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.


Unified Theory Visual Model Draft ver.9

page: 3
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in


posted on May, 9 2012 @ 04:29 PM

Originally posted by moebius
reply to post by mzungu

Must have overlooked it, can you point me to the passage where you introduce your new model of the atom?

i spent most of the first pass explaining the creation of matter through fractal/patterned compression/distortion of electromagnetic space, starting from the first spinning particle generating patterned shells of energy that, when stable, may develop into more complex structures as shorter and shorter wavelengths are allowed by increased density, these more complex stand-alone structures could be considered atoms. if you scroll up just a bit you will find visual representations of how this model differs from bohr's model of ionic and convalent bonding of atoms in molecules.

Have you considered to introduce/discuss your hypotheses and their implications/predictions separately one at a time?

that is what i am doing. through each pass of the model a more indepth look at the theory takes place, and more connections are made. definitive predictions/implications, outside of the observance of the interactions of natural forces and inconsistancies in our attempts to explain them, as i have said before, cannot be made at this time. that is unless you can point me to a flux-proof jar salesman?

Btw a lot theories in physics are quite compact. Think of newtonian dynamics, electrodynamics, hell even quantum mechanics(despite being hard to grasp/work with).

the theory is that the universe is made from a rarefied ‘ultimate’ non particle gas, which ebbs and flows and compresses and expands into 'kinks' of patterned energy. these 'kinks' generate rotating/spinning/wobbling particles when the conditions are right, which lead to the formation of molecules and matter. that compact enough for ya? obviously i couldn't make a claim like that without backing it up with a significant amount of research, which i am trying to present in an as easy to read article as i can.
edit on 9/5/12 by mzungu because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 9 2012 @ 04:38 PM

Originally posted by moebius
reply to post by galactix

I don't think that you can say that phonons cause energy fluctuations. Phonon energy follows a distribution explains thermal fluctuations/noise akin to thermal noise in conductors. The fluctuations are there whether you ignore phonons or not.

Heat is not energy in motion but the energy transfered from one system to another. It is a quantity. Heat transfer and heat capacity are separate terms.

As you say yourself you can cause a heat flow -> transfer heat.

The transfer happens by thermal interactions usually microscopic interactions of the system particles but also thermal radiation.

very well put. this principle is essentially the foundation of my theory. the energy entities we hypthesise about and the particles we detect are byproducts of the behaviour of a self-driven fundamental force of energy, they are a representation of how this energy is transversing, not the cause of the energy itself.

in this model, you can observe the same patterns of interaction on any and all scales. the closer you look, the more you find, as the pattern spirals smaller and smaller, into infinity.
edit on 9/5/12 by mzungu because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 9 2012 @ 04:51 PM
As a presentation of an updated "Aether Theory" you are doing an awesome job. I look forward to trying to understand the rest of your research.

posted on May, 9 2012 @ 05:11 PM
reply to post by twinmommy38

thanks =) i'm trying to avoid calling it an aether theory though, too many negative connotations, which may preclude it from acceptance and divert from the original goal of developing a workable unified theory.

It is ironic that Einstein's most creative work, the general theory of relativity, should boil down to conceptualizing space as a medium when his original premise [in special relativity] was that no such medium existed..

The word 'ether' has extremely negative connotations in theoretical physics because of its past association with opposition to relativity. This is unfortunate because, stripped of these connotations, it rather nicely captures the way most physicists actually think about the vacuum..

Relativity actually says nothing about the existence or nonexistence of matter pervading the universe, only that any such matter must have relativistic symmetry. It turns out that such matter exists. About the time relativity was becoming accepted, studies of radioactivity began showing that the empty vacuum of space had spectroscopic structure similar to that of ordinary quantum solids and fluids. Subsequent studies with large particle accelerators have now led us to understand that space is more like a piece of window glass than ideal Newtonian emptiness.

It is filled with 'stuff' that is normally transparent but can be made visible by hitting it sufficiently hard to knock out a part. The modern concept of the vacuum of space, confirmed every day by experiment, is a relativistic ether. But we do not call it this because it is taboo.

edit on 9/5/12 by mzungu because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 9 2012 @ 06:08 PM

Originally posted by mzungu

Increases in spin will cause expansion as magnetic fields rearrange and generally expand imparting new vectors of force (pattern). Could it be a simple as energy conduction and energy absorption?


Cooling has a number of tricks but the mainstay; Expansion and contraction of gases.
Solids and liquids don’t compress that well, so what we use is a gas that compresses to a liquid. By forcing the gas into its liquid state it only takes up a fraction of its original volume. By releasing the liquid gas through a small valve into a bigger chamber of only slightly lower pressure; the smaller volume of liquid becomes a bigger volume of gas. The compressor re-compresses the gas to a liquid requiring relatively little energy. The purpose is to move heat or energy from one place to another. [uphill]

When the gas takes on the bigger volume, the volume starts to suck energy from surrounding space. Surfaces in contact become cold or frosty. The same applies, when the gas is compressed in volume, excess energy is given off. I suggest that when energy differential levels are low, conductance through transfer of energy from one pattern to another is the main form of energy transfer. But when the differential [rate of change] is greater, the electromagnetic spectrum starts to play a bigger part. We can feel it radiating onto our bodies as heat, (infra red), and ‘at higher rates of change’, see it as radiated light.



heat pump: phase change

I liked your heat pump explanation. Adding a bit, it is curious to note that during the compression phase, the heat transfer fluid (usually a hydrocarbon) remains in gas phase at high compression until it cools (releases heat energy) enough to become liquid and during the expansion phase the fluid stays liquid until it gains enough heat to become a vapor.

tizz the phase change that matters - the vast amount of energy in the pattern change.

also: it would be more accurate to state that liquids and solids don't *change volume* under compression the way gasses do, but in fact liquids "compress" (increase pressure) with far less 'work' than do gases: just sayin'

on specific heat:

We observe that different gasses require different amounts of energy to increment in temperature. We further observe that the same gas will change temperature at different rates (given constant energy flux) depending on the 'temperature' of the gas: the specific heat changes as a function of 'heat content'.

We are taught that 'temperature' is a function of kinetic energy alone: the faster it 'moves' the 'hotter' it is and the reason why different molecules have different specific heats is due to the molecule's ability to absorb this energy in other modes, namely vibration (we are told). H2 exhibits all of it's energy as 'temperature' and so has a very small specific heat (that's why it is used in sterling engines, btw).

So larger molecules with more and larger 'atoms' will have larger specific heats, and further, depending on the actual molecular arrangement, have a number of non-linear vibrational 'modes' that 'activate' at higher 'temperatures'. These modes are quantum in nature in that they exhibit clear energy boundaries and levels.

-reminds me of pattern changes in acoustically excited sand sheets-

As far as i know there is no theory that predicts the specific values or energy 'modes' except for the general observations stated above. All our data is purely experimental and tabulated.

on heat transfer:

Molecules appear to exhibit the same response to heat energy flux whether supplied by photons (radiant electromagnetic flux) or contact (convection is simply gas phase conduction), though albeit at different rates depending upon actual temperature differential: conduction remains linear (scaled by 'conductivity') while radiation increases as the 4th power of the heat potential.

Radiant heat transfer requires a greater heat potential to be 'drawn' to the 'cold' reservoir almost in the same way as electric arcs require greater electric potential to leap across gaps.

The question here is ; what is 'contact' (given that our current model of matter is mostly empty space)? Could the heat rate difference between conduction and radiation be a product of the local magnetic field density?

on entropy (my personal conundrum):

Mainly: what is it? and why?

Without getting into definitions that speak of order vs. disorder, and stepping away from statistical thermodynamics, and finally, speaking only about energy transfer in the form of heat: we observe that the amount of 'useful' energy transferred from a hot body to a cold body depends on the rate at which it is transferred.

Can you speak to this?

posted on May, 9 2012 @ 06:10 PM

Originally posted by moebius
reply to post by galactix

I don't think that you can say that phonons cause energy fluctuations.

i didn't: Wikipedia did : just sayin'

posted on May, 9 2012 @ 06:46 PM
reply to post by galactix

also: it would be more accurate to state that liquids and solids don't *change volume* under compression the way gasses do, but in fact liquids "compress" (increase pressure) with far less 'work' than do gases: just sayin'

good point, that is a more accurate description, thanks.

So larger molecules with more and larger 'atoms' will have larger specific heats, and further, depending on the actual molecular arrangement, have a number of non-linear vibrational 'modes' that 'activate' at higher 'temperatures'. These modes are quantum in nature in that they exhibit clear energy boundaries and levels. -reminds me of pattern changes in acoustically excited sand sheets- As far as i know there is no theory that predicts the specific values or energy 'modes' except for the general observations stated above. All our data is purely experimental and tabulated.


Radiant heat transfer requires a greater heat potential to be 'drawn' to the 'cold' reservoir almost in the same way as electric arcs require greater electric potential to leap across gaps.
The question here is ; what is 'contact' (given that our current model of matter is mostly empty space)? Could the heat rate difference between conduction and radiation be a product of the local magnetic field density?

this is what i suggest, more or less. "contact" is a tricky one, in this model, matter isn't so much empty space as it is a pattern of vibration and spin. Hopefully i can make this a bit clearer on the next pass.

on entropy (my personal conundrum): Mainly: what is it? and why? Without getting into definitions that speak of order vs. disorder, and stepping away from statistical thermodynamics, and finally, speaking only about energy transfer in the form of heat: we observe that the amount of 'useful' energy transferred from a hot body to a cold body depends on the rate at which it is transferred. Can you speak to this?

i must admit, entropy is one thing that has been bothering me too. as it's the only quantity in physical science that implies a direction of progress, (or the 'arrow of time'). this model employs a concept of universal time which attempts to explain the relationship of entropy to (magnetic?) energy transfer. when i get to it i'll draw your attention to it. it isn't yet a fully developed concept, but it's a start.
edit on 9/5/12 by mzungu because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 9 2012 @ 07:47 PM
Radii, Volume, Mass, Temperature, Pressure

A balloon is filled with a gas and tied off. The gas is under slightly higher pressure due to elastic stretch in the balloon. The balloon is placed in a chamber and the temperature reduced in the chamber. The balloon shrinks in slight lag to chamber temperature change. Raise the temperature and the balloon expands in slight lag. I.e. balloon in a fridge or oven. If the chamber is completely gas tight, nothing happens although the whole pressure within the chamber changes. I.e. temperature and pressure are changing with no volume change. (A matched set of opposing forces).

If the gas pressure in the chamber is increased the balloon shrinks and visa versa. Temperature lags the pressure change but no longer affects the size / volume of the balloon due to the whole chamber being at that pressure. The radius of the balloon is dependent on surrounding gas pressure relative to its own density (a completely obvious concept, right?). So the diameter of an atom with shells on could conceivably represent the same components? Even an energy particle or light photon should exhibit these properties within a medium of varying densities.

Take the concept of a balloon blown up to about a foot across, pressure inside atmospheric pressure plus the pressure resultant from the balloons stretch / retraction. Ignoring physical issues associated with it, place a second balloon around the first and inflate it. The centre balloon shrinks a bit, but the outer balloon is always larger than a single balloon. Each layer shrinks the center balloon.

Apply this thought process a couple more times; Four shells with space between (4 to keep it simple), depending on components like the strength of the stretch / retraction properties of each balloon and the compressibility of the gas, each of these balloon shells may sit at physically discrete positions. Playing with this simple virtual model you could adjust the strength and thickness of balloons to create different masses with the same volume or visa versa, different volumes with the same mass or matched volume / masses, with different properties.

This virtual model is most affected by surrounding pressure differences and internal thermal (pressure) components of the gas.

Also, there is an opposing concept;

The size of rain drops is bigger in dense atmosphere and smaller as atmospheric pressure reduces. Rain drops have limits that we associate with surface tension. When a certain volume to surface area limit is reached, you could consider it a surface tension limit, the droplet breaks; usually into two or three separate droplets.

In the denser atmosphere the pressure assists the surface tension and this limit is able to increase. We use sudden drops in pressure to atomize scent and fuel and chemicals in many industrial processes. Different fluids have all got limits between the smallest and largest droplets formed within a particular density of medium.

Smaller droplets combine and larger droplets break down, (re: the atomic elements; iron (Fe) is supposed to be this type of preferred structure, element number 26 with atomic mass of 55.58 AMUs). Iron was mentioned in relation to ferrous elements all having similar diameters 3.14 to 3.58 in total range and Iron at 3.34 Angstroms. Which is also right in the middle of the biggest to smallest of the elements atom diameters, i.e. 1A to 7A. It’s why big droplets often split into threes. (Surface area to volume ratio limit 113).

The diameter's relation to frequency has a greater correlation to mass than the adding of energy particles. Concepts of quantum sized energy particles and the character parts they play within atoms, i.e. protons and neutrons as mass particles making atoms heavier were always in conflict with mass and volume decreases as related to diameters of atoms less than 20 AMUs, (Neon).

Cubic Angstrom versus atomic mass. 1 / vol x mass versus atomic mass.


Anything will exist between limits of biggest to smallest (talking atoms). If density is accepted as fractal pattern, i.e. “Energy density”, then if a volume is decreased in size, it’s density is increased, (assuming no energy loss). Pattern within a volume can influence inverse square concepts by direction of pattern deflecting energy from source.

If a wave form requires a physical space or volume to exist within, certain volumes or spaces (distances however small) can be perceived as not suporting certain wavelengths. This is a second link to prime number volume steps. During volume changes, some volumes will suport a wavelength but most wont.

posted on May, 9 2012 @ 07:52 PM

If a fundamental wave frequency is associated with a particular volume; then only volumes i.e. diameters or spaces that are whole number multiples will be able to support to that frequency.

Within this model the nucleus vibrates producing three dimensional compression waves that move out across the unrinkled space using it as a medium while at the same time the unrinkled space moves in toward the atom nucleus, providing for the lost density of the out going waves and appling external pressure to the shells.

Higher densities allow shorter wavelengths to to exist within the same physical space. Higher densities require more shells to create the necessary energy steps to support that density. Shells will expand when compression and frequency allow a more dense pattern to start forming within. i.e. the new shells form within and cause the volume step. The volume will try to shrink again until the prefered volume to pattern density is reached.

Putting this into some prospective.
This model has atoms but they are not Bohr model based. (I.e. not made of positives & negatives)

There are three main differences
1. This model still recognizes protons neutrons and electrons and other energy particles but they are not actually part of working atoms. Such energy particles are regarded as being temporary and usually created by smashing things together or emitted by fat overly dense atoms like a splash of sweat.

2. Shells exist; but not as electron support. Shells are only part of a three dimensional fractal pattern that makes up part of the energy and mass of a dynamic atom.

3. “Atoms run down” without an energy supply.
Atoms were always finite meaning they must have a start and an end. Unless a miracle was being considered that broke known (provable) physics; the atom was always going to need a source of energy.

In this model atoms spin and vibrate and compress magnetic components of space, pulling it in from all directions to be crinkled and sent back out as vibration. Matter is made from energy structures of (extremely) compressed magnetic space. Both the atoms and the ‘bond structures between atoms’ are components that make up the mass of a material in relation to volume.

posted on May, 9 2012 @ 08:42 PM
Light, Gravity, Time and Spave

F = X / R2
The force felt = the original force / the distance away squared.
F = M1 x M2 x G / R2
This is the formula that according to Discovery channel is only 99.99% accurate.

It got man to the moon and beyond of course, small matter that the moon was10 meters out of predicted position. With some history going back to observations in the late 1800s of the orbit of Mercury being slightly out, Einstein put forward a pretty famous theory that Time and Space were intrinsically linked.

Part of the theory goes like this; I have an appointment with you tomorrow in town at a physical address, but the address is actually time dependant. 09:00 is different from 10:00 or 10:30 as they are at physically different places in the solar system. This part of the argument is quite convincing at first. The overall theory with associated math of 1905 - 1917 was a solution mathematically to the problem, but it was also a totally radical way of looking at the universe.

These theories were tied into his theories about light and his dismissal of the concept of the Aether in favor of his own time-space theories. Not to take anything away (he was brilliant) but there was also a lot of politics involved. Part of the dismissal of the Aether was due to an experiment that looked at the frequency of light in different directions, called the Michelson-Morley experiment.

The preconception was that due to earth’s rotation and physical movement through the Aether, light would have different velocities when looking toward or away from this direction of movement. A telescope capable of accurately measuring the frequency of light is pointed at a star every night for a year. Accounting for both rotation of planet and also rotation around the sun, the experiment failed; the frequency stayed constant.

The assumption is that this disproves the concept of the Aether as being the medium of light. I disagree with the logic. I suggest that only a particular perception of “what the Aether is”, that considers the Aether as purely a medium and nothing more, that hasn’t considered that entropy (running down) conflicts with conservation of energy, and that atom’s must need a source of some form of energy.

With the Aether moving toward all matter, I suggest how we perceive the experimental results might need some rethinking. If space is moving towards matter, magnetic fields will exist around the observer, their equipment and the observed; ‘creating local environments’ of space density, affecting perspective not time.

I suggest that light changes speed dependant on the space energy density that it is traveling through. If space falls towards planets and stars and matter then it probably thins out between places containing matter, gets stretched creating a red shift, meaning all the stars would appear to be accelerating away from us while it is actually space accelerating both towards the observer and the observed. That is if it is thought the red shift was being caused purely by standard Doppler Effect.

Remember the balloon example where changing the surrounding environment affected the balloon volume.
In this model energy particles and certain types of wave like energy smoke rings are affected by the energy density of space through which they travel. Change in frequency, compression, and speed of propagation are dependent on relative density of the medium.

These concepts of particles and atoms requiring energy, present solutions for why the solar systems on the edge of galaxies appear to be traveling faster than it is predicted they should; the Aether is denser towards the center of the galaxies meaning a good supply of energy to all atoms causing less attraction, while the Aether out by the perimeter solar systems would be thinner a relatively less dense source of energy for atoms, causing more suction between matter; therefore they would move faster. Not “Dark Energy or Dark Matter”.

Planets are made up of lots of atoms; they require a lot of energy to move toward them. Atoms in the center of a large enough body would move very closely together and without enough energy to sustain them would start to scavenge each others energy. This type of reaction might be regarded as a low level atomic reaction? Earth's molten core or Jupiter's glowing described in this model as ‘rendering’ a product of lag forces.

The implications of space moving towards mass, will seriously affect how we perceive solar mechanics and why stars burn for so long or how galaxies form. In the 19th century scientists believed the Sun ran on coal, the age of the sun and earth were calculated by how long it could have burned for, based on diameter, bible interpretations and other belief structures. In the 20th century the view was refined to atomic reactions of hydrogen converting to helium etc.
edit on 9/5/12 by mzungu because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 9 2012 @ 08:59 PM
Remember, God made all the Hydrogen in the big bang, our bible and scientists tell us so. The idea was officially thought up in the 1920’s by a priest and was based on Hubble’s calculations of the ‘Red Shift” phenomenon.

Covering some of the facts: two of four age associated arguments against big bang have already been advanced in detail; the first was, physical distance apart, versus time since separation, and the second was, visible separation of 26 Billion light years timed back to 13 billion years ago.

The age of other galaxies is based or calculated on what we think we know and a large part of that is based on the belief of a big bang and hydrogen from the big bang forming into solar systems and galaxies. The evenness of the distribution of the hydrogen causes further logic holes in relation to the age problem inherent to big bang concepts.

Particularly in regard to the apparent age of the visible galaxies, where the light has already taken 13 billion years to reach our telescopes and the apparent lack of spare hydrogen that’s going to be required to continue to create new galaxies or even continue to supply the old ones. 13 billion light years and the fog isn’t an issue.

So obviously, not coal. This brings us to the conflict between the so called expanding universe concepts and the condensing mass universe. I suggest hydrogen as the fuel is unlikely for the following reasons:
When you have 4 H atoms mass in a ¼ of the volume like in He or mass equivalent of 55 H atoms in just about the same space again (Fe). That's compression. Does that match anyone’s observations of a shrinking Sun or galaxy or universe?

The 13.8 billion year ago big bang concept as a source of hydrogen, once the age issue is highlighted, creates such an event of the type that couldn’t have happened in any time period that would make sense relative to its original justifications, combined with the absence of hydrogen of quantities sufficient to support the original idea; applied across the visible universe; the idea starts to fail.

This model offers that the sun and stars create hydrogen but also offers the twist of, do we still have to regard hydrogen as a source fuel or do we regard it as a state of energy pattern compression? Linking hydrogen, helium and alpha particles?

The sun isn’t just some big gas ball the core is much more massive. The lack of hydrogen fog and knowing that gasses grade themselves based on density, questions about energy output to fuel input and age of galaxies as far as we can see and the thought of all that hydrogen coming from one magic spot, on such and such a day at something o’clock is; (fill in you own adjective).

We’re 8 light minutes out; the volume related to that radius, and the energy mass contained within that volume is staggering. A ball casts the same shadow as a circular card meaning our silhouette is a circular area less than half the earth’s surface area. Against the surface area of a sphere with an 8 light minute radius our silhouette is an almost meaningless small number.

Looking into the ratio of the sun's energy output verses the energy Earth receives, our magneto-sphere deflects most of the higher energy particles and shorter compression waves around us and we bleed heat to space. Despite this, Earth's little surface area collects enough energy to sustain all life and has done so for hundreds of millions of years in a relatively stable fashion.

Black holes gobble mass, (we can now watch it), and stars clearly create mass because its not coming from anything else in the quantities required, or for the time scales and distances involved. Can you see coal trucks or hydrogen tankers lined up past the rock formerly known as Pluto? Is it foggy out there?

I reject; other ‘dimensions’, other ‘realities’ and other ‘time’ as possible answers to balancing this fuel / time / energy equation. Those theories are too fantastic for this heretic. Start and expiry dates on the universe are concepts better suited to ‘SciFi Channel’ or a Religious drama show. Hearing the ex- director of the Hubble scope claiming that it was basically possible to see back to the after glow of the event.

Normally when you sneeze some one says bless you and hands you some tissues. Are we now to fear the great white handkerchief at the end of the universe or is that superstition? -Douglas Adams

This is just a humble model, but the model suggests the sun having space move toward it; condensing it into patterned energy structures, like hydrogen, then helium, etc. Spitting small energy particles and magnetic vibrations back out into space. Giant energy transfer tunnels between places of differing rotational energy. Rotating black energy (gravity) holes, that suck space down into convectoring turbulences of ‘energy compressed pattern’.

posted on May, 9 2012 @ 09:22 PM
The next three sections deal in some depth with rotating objects and their influence on their environment, and how rotating forces can translate between planes when limits are reached.

Electricity and Electrons
Many engineers make the comment that electricity flow and magnetic fields act like gyroscopes. Kind of a hard thing to argue against with regards to Nintendo Wii remotes containing laser gyroscope and inertia chips (silicon chips).

The point is that many argue that there is proof of electrons, the argument is not that they don’t exist, but that their identity and character are different than normally portrayed. I suggest that much of an electrons assigned character comes from the original concepts of positive and negative especially in the roles it is supposed to play within the standard atom models and electrical theory.

For example statements like “an amp is 6.323 x 10 to the power of 18 Electrons passing a point on a wire in 1 second”, or, “In an Ionic bond the surplus electron moves to a empty position on the other atoms shell”, or electrons jump from shell to shell as part of electricity flow, from ‘hole to hole’, or for that matter ‘a sea of electrons’, minor charge carriers etc.

These are all concepts that were originally based on the original Bohr model of the atom (Positive and Negative Charge Particles in Planetary Orbits). Spin was never a consideration until the 1950s but by then the Protons Neutrons and of course Electrons were firmly placed characters. The Bohr model is embedded in the culture of physics, electricity and chemistry, whether people are aware of it or not.

When measuring electricity, we are measuring the strength of a magnetic field given off by an energy flow relative to a standard, no electron count, same with lightening etc. We don’t count, we calculate based on what we already know. When discoveries are made it seems natural to describe them in ways that we know. "By the action of this or that …."

The proof against electrons is the lightning connection. Our atmosphere only extends out to approximately 100km while the magneto-sphere extends thousands of kms. The shells of the magnetosphere charge up with energy given off by the sun; the energy transfers between these magnetic shells. E.L.F.s come down from somewhere above the 100km mark, but only become visible as they ionize atmosphere at this height.
The rarefied gas atoms turn like compass needles and the atoms spin faster and start emitting energy particles of varying frequencies.

Lightening that we see is light emissions from ionized gas. That’s light, x-ray’s, heat etc. There is no proof of electron flow as a cause. It is the interaction of the energy flow and the atoms that cause the effects that we recognize as electromagnetism or electricity and not electrons or charge particle movement. The common concept that ‘lightening is electricity’ caused by electron movement becomes stretched when electron transfer cannot be the answer in these upper atmosphere lightening phenomena as above 100km there isn't enough matter or energy particles to account for the amount of energy transferred.

Energy is clearly transferring from one place to another, but the nature of this energy transfer is different in different media / or on different media. In this model the energy transfer that causes lightening and electricity is not an electron movement or atom based energy at all. Atoms represent an increased density in space. Atoms require some form of energy supply to stop from degenerating.

This model has already described the differences between charge, polarity, energy density, volume and electricity along with descriptions of the forces and stresses on rotational space. Starting with the spinning sphere which automatically creates a north and south polarity. Looking in from the South Pole the rotation is clockwise.

In the early days of electricity and magnetism there were many unknowns, but it was recognized that they interact and that the magnetic fields appeared to have directions as well as forces of attraction and repulsion. With observations of static charges on dust particles, the chemistry of the time and other beliefs that matched, i.e. it was regarded that power flowed from the most positive place to the most negative, which matched in with the Earth's own magnetic field and the labeling that was accepted at the time. Remember the flipped labeling on the compass is relative to the north and south labeling of the Earth.

Based within original postulates all Faraday’s work is 100% correct. The magnet labeling has changed in between and there is a difference between moving positive charge particles and holes.

posted on May, 9 2012 @ 09:53 PM
With the new Bohr model came some re-labeling which is the current convention in physics, but not electrical today. Mobile positive charges being replaced by mobile negative charges.Despite the change in direction of ‘current perception’ the forces are still the same forces. The labeling is just labeling; ‘Right?’ Not quite.. Remember it started with the earth’s magnetic field direction.

I suggest that the misconception occurs back with the concepts of what is North and what is South and differences in the forces that make up side and end fields. In this model energy flow and rotation of space on many scales replace the concept of positive or negative energy particles that move. Energy particles that are created and forced into movement are a secondary event. Energy particles that are carried in an energy flow can intensify the action of the flow like debris in a river.

In electrical engineering the right hand rule is used for motors and the left hand rule used for generators. From this perspective, magnets are by labeling being represented as having a generator function. Like the atom and the sun? If the sun and magnets are generating and the planets motoring then Venus is indeed spinning backwards in more ways than one.

Beyond this issue of the motoring and generating currents of rotating bodies caused by which way the lag goes, the magnet is still, (not moving). Motor or generator functions of rotation direction are not concepts normally associated with magnets or atom spin direction or field.

North and South Poles are an observer's perspective of the same event. 'Same way' rotating field cancelling causes attraction and secondary rotation. Counter rotating fields cause separation. The energy particles also try to naturally move up the page. This force is important.

Lag creates secondary limits, lag causes extra forces of repulsion (within limits), and lag stops the atom from dragging itself into full cancelling contact and self destruction.

The Tube Visual Model
"What the hell is this, some kinda tube?" -Zap Brannigan

Remember tubes are basically virtual, and actually represent stresses on surrounding space as caused by differentials in rotation. I.e. could be same direction different speed. Lag will cause the space surrounding these stress tubes to try to rotate, meaning it’s a scaleable concept. One big tube can be made to represent any number of smaller tubes.

Think of the effect on twisted rubber bands. The effect of ‘pulling’ is caused by the way the force is concentrated and allows the unbalanced rotational energy to transfer from North to South Pole “OR” South to North Pole depending on which rotational force was greater, or viewers' perspective. Both the energy particle models are right and wrong in perception of flow direction. Matter caught in this energy transfer will be affected by its field lag direction(s).

Energy potentials between areas try to balance but are subject to limits of distance, diameters, differential speeds and of course environment density. In places like the Sun where both ends are in high speed rotation relative to a dense surrounding space the tubes become visible as they ‘light’ trapped plasma within.

Remember ‘Eddy’s’ are caused by differences of flow rate in a medium. End on ‘north’s and south’s pull together but side on they push apart.

Differences between centre driven eddies and perimeter driven eddies

Lag causes simular results but the driving force is in the opposite direction

Perimeter driven poles transfer energy inward to a density limit caused by lag again that causes secondary internal rotation at a higher speed to a limit of density. Relative rotational energy pattern limits within a medium can redirect energy(s) relative rotational direction.

edit on 9/5/12 by mzungu because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 9 2012 @ 11:11 PM
Translation of forces

If two places rotate relative to each other; one of the possible ways of looking at it is to consider that a secondary force of rotation are also being created either as the tube previously described or as a section thereof.

Along a section of tube these forces could be a mixture of relative directions and strengths.

While layers can be pushed together there is a clear limit where there is no differential between layers. When the distance that a force changes in is really short relative to the density of the medium, i.e. when the shear stresses are at their greatest, they offer a type of 90˚ angle of energy translation across planes, within the pattern and its limits.

This pattern of energy transfer to a certain extent may be translatable between scales. Each turbulance pattern can be cut to represent another scale and another translation of 90˚ in plane of the rotational energy. Once again this represents an increase in energy density / increase of pattern of space within a volume.

So that we don’t get too far from the real world, I liken this effect to the rubber band on a model aeroplane. As the band is wound is starts as a double helix twist but as the energy builds up, ‘secondary twists build up’, then three layer knots appear etc. until the band breaks or is released. Unlike a rubber band these forces are “virtual strain” in the magnetic medium. Matter, (which represents compressed energy patterns), will be affected by these virtual strains. Unlike the rubber band where one end was held and the other wound these virtual forces have differentials with slip and lag and are driven by rotational energy momentum.

Remembering that I’m only pointing at stresses that are potentially “one” of the the influence forces contained within an area / locale, under extreme stress and not suggesting that the whole of space or even this locale moves like this.

A spinning sphere; no matter what the size, (the sun, a planet or an atom; with poles and subpoles), could be perceved to want to line up with the strongest energy pattern in any given locale and by virtue of its rotation will influence surrounding space just as it has been influenced.

Atoms connecting with other atoms with polar and subpolar 3-dimensional energy bonds of this ‘nature’, are just another scale. The idea I offer is that all of these forces potentially exist in the same space at the same time and they inter-connect / inter-react across all 3-dimensions within limits of scale. Potential patterns can only exist within the limits of the environment and the forces involved which have variables that oscilate within sets of limits.

Only some volumes or spacings will support a multiplying of frequencies. The frequencies that are regarded as doubeling and tripling can also be regarded as halving or splitting into thirds. Diameters relate to volumes but frequency (resonate in a space) is a distance. Increase in compression density allows a shorter vibration, i.e a smaller distance. A compression like an ice scater bringing their arms into their body will spin faster.

I'm suggesting energy transfer gearing and storage within a plane.

Forces shear at 90˚, transferring energy from one plane to concentrated pattern in another plane. Rotational Forces are concentrated by the density of the medium, concentrated by lag, and concentrated by gearing of pattern within pattern.

edit on 9/5/12 by mzungu because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 9 2012 @ 11:20 PM
Forces across magnetic space
This model points to the extension of the rotational magnetic influence onto space from the original energy particle or atom to be an important influence of bonding structures and behaviors. Diameters of atoms and number and angle of bond structures being influenced by the energy density of the energy particle or atom relative to immediately surrounding space, and further influenced by any flux movement in that area of space, whatever the cause.

Permanent magnets have fields around the bar in 3 dimensional shells like a donut and the ends have distinctly attractive qualities towards each other and repulsive towards same type. Looking at the picture below, both ends have an even distribution of filings and the filings aren’t moving along the paper, suggesting the field is stretching? Using a compass, (another magnet), an instant interaction occurs and the compass turns. The difference between powder and filings is that you can see that the filings have turned like little compass needles and are lined up end to end.

Each row separating itself from the row next to it suggesting; small fields rotating around each row, with a ‘thickness off the paper’ and ‘radial spacing’ of similar dimensions; Observe how the pattern changes and intensifies in a ‘step’ as a pattern density is reached near the magnet, and a new pattern starts.

When doing tests with magnets, card and iron powder, it was found the bands could be influenced small amounts by adding or subtracting the total amount of powder used and then re-tapping. Even the coarseness of the filings had minor affects to placement of the bands after re-tapping. Remember the card is a plane section cut through the 3D field.

Some crystals allow the flow of energy in one plane or direction but not another. Some metals like platinum are classed as Para-magnetic, translating magnetic direction. Metallic bond structures as found in conductors contain domains containing billions of middle sized atoms with bond angles that allow interaction with other structures. Synchronization is a way for energy to transfer through structures of mass, while allowing the mass (domains) a way to stay semi independent from the energy transfers. The domains become another scale of bond angles and structures. Each level of scale allows the next to act a bit like a carrier wave medium to the energy with simular limits to any wave guide within its level of structure.

Graphs and Waves (Light)

Firstly that center line that goes from left to right on a graph is usually a time line. This time line is built into just about all our measurements from “first observation”, whether we are conscious of it or not as “a rate of change”. It is important to understand that this is not something that you can stand beside and look sideways at….like a light wave….or ‘by cutting a piece out of a wire’, and saying the signal was ‘that…. long’. This may sound like a silly statement to a physicist for one reason, and a silly statement from a surfer’s perspective for completely different reasons.

To reveal the blind spot I ask the reader, ‘if they have ever seen a documentary where light wasn’t represented as a sine wave?’ Where red shift wasn’t represented as a stretch or compression of the sine wave? Isn’t that the same as acknowledging that the Michelson - Morley experiment was wrong? ‘One of the premises of “Time-Space”.
The concept that Red Shift is a simple stretch or compression of a sine wave, is a vast over simplification and potentially huge blind spot. Firstly the standard example of a bell at a train crossing; the bell is making sound through air compressions that radiate outward from source. So as you advance toward this series of compression waves; the period between waves appears shorter and we regard it as having an increased frequency. The waves themselves also appear denser with higher changes of rate. As you move away from the source the frequency decreases and the apparent density of the waves has also decreased.

In the simplest of the standard models the subtle difference between frequency and tone are treated as a single sine wave compression. It gets more complicated when in light there are still arguments over wave or particle concepts. In the simplest model everything from energy particles to radio signals are being represented as a version of a simple frequency based wave. Putting this bit of magic into real terms its like describing everything that happens within our air environment as a sine wave, noise, the wind, shockwaves, smoke rings, wind blown sand and particles, the lot. The Aether is a medium that these events happen within.

edit on 9/5/12 by mzungu because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 9 2012 @ 11:23 PM
The concept of classing these separate types of events purely by frequency and using it as a main proof within the red shift argument of an expanding universe theory, based on this assumption it's a stretch of faith not a proof of dark matter or an expanding universe. The electromagnetic flux density near a star will be vastly greater than the density half way between that star and the next. A meter radio wave wasn’t given off by an atom and a photon probably wasn’t created by a spinning wobbling magnetic object of mass.

posted on May, 9 2012 @ 11:29 PM
Energy Particles and Light, wave or particle?

How would you graph a spinning ball that is moving along its longitudinal axis? How would you graph a spinning ball that is moving perpendicular to spin axis? Depending on the points of reference both can be represented as having amplitude and frequency. How about smoke rings, they move and have a period, or the small energy particles predicted in this model, particles whose center of mass is semi undefined or particles with more than one axis. A smoke ring can be graphed as hyperbolic curve, an Archimedean spiral and a straight line just for starters.

Regarding lightening; upper atmosphere discharges cover large areas but as the pressure of the atmosphere / density increases the diameter of the discharge decreases. This contracting of the energy “stream” within an increasing density of space may suggest that matter offers a better path for energy to traverse or it may mean that the air between layers is acting like a dielectric membrane in a capacitor, (or something more?).

Shells represent forces that lay the patterns with a particular orientation within the shell; stresses in space with physical orientation that have forces of attraction and repulsion that change over time in response to environmental density. (Remember the balloons).

Perimeter driven eddy’s concentrate energy inward until limits are reached.

The translation of energy from one plane to another at times where limits peak would offer an explanation for lightening in its sudden appearance and indistinct starting point, the force that drives it and the lack of charge particles etc.

Other patterns can form from variations of the same forces to within their limits.

It has been pointed out that not every energy event in electromagnetic space is a sine wave wiggling through space. The type of sine wave seen on the sea is a wave that only happens between two different media of differing density. On the surface of a fish tank you might see a sine wave but tapping the tank half way down causes only a compression wave.

The surface wave still has compression components in it but other components of displacement (energy translation) structure the pattern. The displacement is at 90˚ to the original compression, and as a result of vectors changing over time as the wave moves, forces of rotation are imparted. The 90˚ displacement was in proportion to the reduction of the density of the medium.

There are a number of candidates or possible configurations for both particles and waves within the electromagnetic medium and within standard theories. Most wave theories contain propagation of electro static and electro magnetic components. Wave forms of amplitude and frequency are placed on graphs.

In an atmosphere, pressure changes and movement cause, smoke rings, compression waves, shock waves and cavitations of known properties and propagation. This model presents “rates of change” limits of the medium (air) as a limit for sound and where a shock wave is created when you try to push the limit.
This compression limit is based on and changes with density and has electromagnetic components.

Particles and other types of wave generally move slower than a compression wave. Einstein worked very hard toward an absolute proof that light was a particle. In particular reference to the detectable mass of energy particles and Niels Bohr’s model where electrons and photons have similar mass but different characteristics. Standard models all use particles called photons and then try to claim Doppler shift causes for Red Shift, i.e. a stretched sine wave through space.

Some madmen (me included) point out that a simple particle as per this model tunnels a spiral path and a super energy toroid wave might approach the speed of light. Both have causes of movement, and both have frequency relative to movement. In the medium of flux that is a compression limit of light speed meaning we don’t know of anything that goes faster, especially not particles.

Using this atmosphere analogy for flux to define the difference between a wave and an energy particle, shock waves represent a much higher concentration of energy and usually are generated where opposing forces meet or where standing wave components cause large amounts of differential slip.

If the line between wave and particle is considered as being a certain energy density, where energy movement on one or more axis is able to support a shock wave as per the primitive particle of this model, or a toroid with an energy step density that we don’t see in our normal scale of gasses, then a number of extra questions and limitations appear.

In the fish tank example the compression wave traveled the fastest and velocity of propagation was independent on how hard you tapped the tank. Compared to compression waves, surface waves and smoke rings have slower forward movement velocities based on energy levels of the displacement.

posted on May, 9 2012 @ 11:36 PM
If an energy particle is to be contemplated as moving within a magnetic energy based universe, (an electromagnetic vibration in an electromagnetic space), a particle will probably travel slower than a compression wave due to this limit unless some extra force is applied or in play some how. The velocity and cause of sustained movement have to be identified or we might have to reassess some perceptions of friction and particles. (Will come back to this).

The Hubble’s deep field (time exposure) of galaxies claimed to have emitted their light 13 billion years ago, points to some serious staying power. Even if the distance was out by a factor of 10. The idea is, the detection of an electromagnetic influence that far from its source, or that the lights in the night sky are cause / sources of electromagnetic influence detectible with the eye, or energy transfer over large intersecting spheres of influence. (For a start it’s a bigger scale than usually perceived for magnetic influence or energy transfer)

The frequency range of the visible spectrum versus the whole spectrum is itty bitty. The frequency and quantity of light emitted by matter; increases with temperature or energy input.

Spectrometry 101

Drawing a parallel here between light, lightening and earth resonance. The “Schumann Earth cavity resonance” increases with sun spot activity from 7 to almost 15 beats per second. It’s a radio signal that vibrates between the surface of the earth and the troposphere, (within shells of atmosphere and magnetic layers, containing density steps).

A vibration that moves outward, from a high density to a lower density takes steps that are affected by the lay of space in a layer. Inverse square concepts are affected by these layer steps. Shells can act as wave guides reflecting shorter frequencies back in or absorbing; it’s a proportional thing, (Reflection, refraction).
Shear shells act like air curtains at doors with patterned energy flows mostly on a different plane. Orientation of the X, Y and Z axis perspective of the pattern) .

Longer frequencies continue outward. As a (compression) vibration moves squarely away from its central source; if not long enough or if not possessing enough energy it will be diverted by the air curtain effect.
Even waves that do pass through will have extra vectors added to them. (Compression waves have decompression components and many other vectors).

A chaotic vibration source will have the vibrations cut up into wave components shorter than the original wave (Quantums) where some components combine with others within shells and some components that transfer their energy into other planes with various angles of refraction. With multiple shells each adding to the density in steps, internal densities can increase; the inverse square concept comes into play as a change of energy component. I.e. A rate of change.

Stress (force over area) on the surface area increases at the square of X radius; a wave that moves out from the source, encountering these shells, will have many of these wave components striped away into the layers of patterned structures. Decompression components of (chaotic source) uneven compression waves have their own “values” as well.

Compression waves that combine in a high density piece of space and move out into a lower density area of space will be affected by the density change in relation to their components and the decompression component is part of this.

The surface area on the inside of a shell is smaller than the surface area on the outside of the same shell with a rate of difference proportional to the thickness of the shell and how far it was from the source of the vibration, (Inverse square).

The energy level on the inside of an energy curtain relative to the outside of the curtain can change at a different rate over a given distance, (Energy in steps).

This difference of “rate of change” results in density changes that affect and influence each other. The shells would not necessarily decrease in energy at exactly the inverse square rate. The direction of different levels of lightening might be a good example of this. Blue jets go up, Sprites and ELF’s come down.

The Casimir effect of plates charging up and attracting each other in a vacuum, or the concept of a capacitor having positive and negative charge on the plates separated by a dielectric. The affect of pattern orientation in space (direction of stretch, compression and rotation) and the electromagnetic / electrostatic orientation concepts of a dielectric and many of the concepts of wave propagation seem to be the same thing.

Heating, compressing or applying extra spin to such a structure (atom shell) so that it absorbs more energy, will (in this model on the shells) cause the shells to expand and thin due to density of medium increasing inside the shell like global warming causing heating and expansion.

posted on May, 9 2012 @ 11:38 PM
Thinner shells and altered ratio of energy levels on the shells means that shorter and shorter wavelengths of light can be emitted through geared rotational sub-pole lenses of energy on the outer shells. (Resulting in ultra speed toroid wave particles?) There is the first hint of light.

So long as extra energy is supplied; emission of light would start with longer frequencies but a sub-pole type lens would speed up as the shell raises and thins. As the shells adjust the shorter frequencies can be emitted that would normally be reflected back in. Thus an atom could adjust to its environment.

posted on May, 9 2012 @ 11:53 PM
Graphing Shell Diameters and Mass and Atomic Numbers

The red line that goes from the 0 mark to the right hand of the graph 200AMU is the mass versus the atomic number. The red jagged is the atomic diameters versus the atomic numbers (previously seen). The blue jagged is atomic diameters versus the atomic mass. The dependant (bottom line) scale is the same for both but doesn’t line up. The scale for both graphs had the cut off point at element AN.100, i.e. AMU 257
The choice of how the different axis are graphed comes down to some interpretation.

By superimposing the two graphs the distortion between the two scales become visible (Along with some really intriguing artifacts). Primarily a step has become visible at the ferromagnetic elements (blue graph line). Elements 26, 27, 28, 64 & 66, i.e. their diameters and position in graph forms a distinct pattern within a diameter step.

Melting points and density are inversely proportional at these steps. High melting points are associated with middle diameters and low with the step points in diameters. There seems to be ample proof of the link between stability, energy level and diameter of shells; influencing melt points and bond strengths. Actions and reactions reaching limits within a scale can affect all larger scales, changing the pattern entirely.

This model suggests / predicts that if an atom is accepted as being a roughly spherical “ball” with a rotating vibrating nucleus, and of having a preferred diameter and energy level per dominant pattern and per harmonic step of pattern, Shear Shells forming and taking size steps at harmonic primes where patterns change from one pattern set to the next set.

Density within pattern sets being primarily volume reduction related, i.e. peak to peak of diameters on the chart below; mass increases as volume (associated with those diameters) decreases. Steps up in volume from one set to the next with lag and limits of the medium.

Within this model slip and lag are not losses but rather a type of energy storage created as part of energy transfer; part of the elastic effects and forces of attraction and repulsion, normally associated with magnetism and charge. These comments are also made in relation to physical properties and bond strength relationships to temperature.

Here is a graph that represents the frequency of isotopes of the elements (i.e. no. of naturally occurring versions).

The atomic numbers on the Y axis, and the masses of the isotopes plotted on the X axis. The relative proportions color coded. Tin has 10 isotopes ranging in mass; Xenon has 9 etc.

Clearly there are overlaps in masses and diameters between different elements that stay different elements. Of the first 82 elements in the periodic table, 80 have isotopes considered to be stable. Technetium, promethium (atomic numbers 43 and 61).

All the elements with an atomic number over 82 have only isotopes that are known to decompose through radioactive decay. They are not expected to have any stable, undiscovered ones; that's why lead is considered the heaviest stable element ( element 82 mass 207.2).

With only protons, neutrons and a few electrons to play with, the standard visual models start to hemorrhage. So if not Protons Neutrons and electrons, then what? A single energy particle whose diameter changes only a little, but whose internal pattern structure converts energy into a vibration pattern does fit these results.

Two main concepts associated with charge particles are atomic mass steps found in the elements and the quantum steps found in ‘red shift’ and the concept of the quantum (Piece or vibration?) The second approach being the Planck’s constant concept(s).

Isospin - quantum number differences between protons and neutrons (Fermions). Basonic Bayons or Hyperons within this model are covered by number of active axis of rotation of an energy particle. Halos and halo neculi are a direct result of these multiple axis but within the more complex setting of the atom and shells.

Internal shells would move into secondary axis etc, due to pole slip and deflection, with new pole positions allowing more energy compression and different angles in bond structures along with changes in the strengths of the bonds to other atoms

As the mass increases the shells can to be seen to take steps up in size and then shrink in diameter again.
edit on 9/5/12 by mzungu because: (no reason given)

top topics

<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in