Saturday, March 31, 2018

Ferro-Fluids

When a ferro-fluid is placed on top of a magnet, it morphs into sharp peaks surrounded by shallow valleys. Highly polarized outgoing photons are producing the peaks, while less polarized incoming photons are producing the valleys.


Ferro-fluid

By Steve Jurvetson - http://www.flickr.com/photos/jurvetson/136481113/, CC BY 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=906519

Friday, March 30, 2018

Permanent Magnets

A permanent magnet is a piece of metal, usually iron, which has a permanent magnetic field associated with it.

The way such materials can be explained in terms of zero-point photons, is that the atoms making up a permanent magnet are arranged in such a way that their electrons hook onto one side of nearby zero-point photons more readily than the other side.

The more coordinated and vigorous the atoms are in their lopsided effect on zero-point photons, the stronger the magnet.

Bouncing about inside a magnet, zero-point photons become polarized. They are also given direction and spin. The photons are led into paths going in a north-south direction.

The result is a stream of polarized zero-point photons exiting the magnet from both poles in equal measure.


Magnet inducing spin into photons streaming out of the south and north poles

Correspondingly, there must be entry points for photons at the poles. Otherwise, there would be a permanent photon high-pressure at the poles and a corresponding low-pressure at the sides. This would violate the laws of thermodynamics, and is obviously not happening.

When outgoing polarized photons meet incoming photons, they brush into them, sharing some of their spin. This polarizes the incoming photons as they head towards the magnet. Even before they enter the magnet, they have a certain degree of polarization.


Photons entering and leaving both ends of a magnet

Note that spin is transferred between orbs of opposite charge. Orbs with identical charge do not react with each other since they cannot latch onto each other. However, negative orbs communicate their spin to positive orbs and visa versa. This allows for spin to be maintained and shared.

The sharing of spin from outgoing to incoming photons produces a pattern in which highly polarized outgoing photons are surrounded by progressively less polarized photons. Between each highly polarized outgoing photon, there is a valley, so to speak, of less polarized photons.

To see a manifestation of this pattern, all we have to do is to put a ferro-fluid on top of a magnet.

Thursday, March 29, 2018

Ampère's Right-Hand Grip Rule

Key to understanding Ampère's right-hand grip rule in terms of zero-point photons is to imagine two ions moving through space. By comparing the effect of a positive ion moving from right to left, to the effect of a negative ion moving from left to right, we see that the two cases create identical magnetic fields.

A positive ion can be viewed as a hook covered ball. When it moves through space, it latches on to the hoop covered orbs of zero-point photons. A positive ion moving from right to left sets the negative orbs of the zero-point photons spinning counter-clockwise as viewed from the magnetic north.

The positive orbs spin clockwise.


 
Positive ion producing magnetism in photons by setting their negative orbs spinning

Zero-point photons moving away from the photon after a bounce, are all polarized and spinning. A circular magnetic field radiates out from the moving ion.

Conversely, a negative ion moving from left to right, will set the positive orbs of zero-point photons spinning in the clockwise direction as viewed from the magnetic north. We get zero-point photons spinning with their negative orbs going counter-clockwise and their positive orbs going clockwise.

 
Negative ion producing magnetism in photons by setting their positive orbs spinning

The photons spin the same way in both cases. The magnetic field developed around the two ions are identical.

The two orb model of the photon behaves precisely the way it has to in order to model real world magnetism around charges in motion.

Wednesday, March 28, 2018

The Two Orb Photon

When zero-point photons hit either protons or electrons, the hooks and hoops of the massive particles briefly latch onto the hooks and hoops of the photons. This cause the photons to change their spin and direction before continuing their way back into space.

For stationary protons and electrons, the change in direction and spin is completely random. There is no net effect. But for a charged particle in motion, there is a net effect. Zero-point photons will tend to spin in parallel with the moving particle. Spinning zero-point photons are what we observe as magnetic fields around electrical currents.

However, for this to happen in accordance to Ampère's right-hand grip rule photons cannot be any random configuration of six charged quanta. Their structure must be of a very specific kind.

But their behaviour must be that of two counter-spinning orbs.


Two orb model of the photon

The six charged quanta making up the photon must be modelled as two orbs of opposite charge, one spinning one way and the other spinning the other way at the exact same rate.

If one orb latches onto a charged particle, thus changing its spin, the other orb changes its spin with an exact and opposite amount.

With this model of the photon, Ampère's right-hand grip rule becomes relatively easy to explain.

Tuesday, March 27, 2018

Electric Currents

An electric current can be defined as charge in motion. Normally when we think of electric currents, we think of electrons moving through a conducting wire. However, a positively charged gas, moving through space would also be a current. Any charged object or particle in motion constitutes an electric current.

For a current to be significant, it must have a large number of similarly charged particles, all moving at a similar velocity. The analogy is that of a river of charged particles.

For the purpose of definition, it has been decided that the direction of a current is that of a positive ion in motion. This means that when we have electrons moving through a wire in one direction, the current is by definition in the other direction.

The reason for this is the curious fact that a current always generates a magnetic field around it in such a way that if we hold our right hand thumb in the direction of the current, our fingers fold in the direction of the magnetic field. This is known as Ampère's right-hand grip rule.


Ampère's right-hand grip rule

It does not matter if the current is due to positive ions moving from right to left, or electrons moving left to right. The magnetic field will always circle the current as if it was caused by positive ions moving from right to left.

This indifference of the magnetic field to whether the electric current is caused by electrons moving in one direction or positive ions moving in the opposite direction is at first glance puzzling. However, once we understand the effect that charges in motion have on zero-point photons, the mystery solves itself.

A positive charge moving in one direction will set zero-point photons spinning around it in a manner identical to that of a negative charge moving in the opposite direction.

The magnetic field accompanying all and every electric current can be explained entirely in terms of zero-point photons being polarized and set spinning.

Monday, March 26, 2018

Chemistry

Chemical bonds are fairly easy to understand in terms of electron clouds.

We know that electron clouds around atomic nuclei come in layers, in which the innermost layer can have a maximum of 2, the next one out a maximum of 8, and farther out still another 8, etc.

The way this works when modelled with bouncing electrons is that electrons sometimes find ways to bounce off more than one atomic nucleus at a time.

In the case of hydrogen molecules, we have two protons held together with two electron clouds.

Since every hydrogen atom has 2 available slots in its inner layer, yet only 1 electron cloud, the most efficient configuration of two hydrogen atoms, is to have them share their respective electron clouds so as to make the most of the available space. The electrons bounce alternately off one and the other proton.

The 2 slots available for electrons to bounce are thus filled. Instead of each proton having only one electron bouncing off of them, both of them get two slots filled through mutual sharing of their single electron.

This yields a more efficient configuration, and energy is released in the process. Nearby zero-point photons are kicked up in energy.

However, the hydrogen molecule is not particularly efficient. A more efficient configuration can be achieved by combining two hydrogen molecules with a carbon atom. The product of such a configuration yields methane.




Two hydrogen molecules and a carbon atom combines to form methane

Carbon has 4 empty slots in its second layer. When these slots get filled with electron clouds associated with the hydrogen molecules, an efficient configuration can be made in which all 8 outer slots of the carbon atom are filled in such a way that every hydrogen atom has its 2 slots occupied.

Note that efficiency is closely related to size. Two independent hydrogen atoms occupy more space than a single hydrogen molecule. Two hydrogen molecules and a carbon atom occupy more space than a single methane molecule.

The process of going from big and bloated to small and compact releases energy. The more compact a configuration, the less energy is left in it for further reactions. Inefficient, wide configurations, carry more potential energy than smaller denser ones.

Sunday, March 25, 2018

Gravity

The electric force between an electron and a proton is due to their difference in charge. A proton carries a net charge of +1, while the electron carries a net charge of -1. The fact that there is a total of 2177 charged quanta making up the proton and a total of 3 charged quanta making up the electron does nothing to alter this. It is the net charge of the respective particles that matters.

Together, the proton and electron forms a neutral whole with a net charge of 0. However, this is not to say that there is no charge surrounding a neutral atom. There is a big difference between no net charge and no charge at all.

Neutral matter produce just as many charged neutrinos as charged matter. The only difference is that the charge adds up to exactly zero in the case of neutral matter, while charged matter produce an excess of either negatively or positively charged neutrinos.

The electric force depends on the net imbalance in charge between two bodies. When the number of positively and negatively charged neutrinos around a body average out to zero, there is no electric field.

However, as previously mentioned, there is a tiny difference in reactivity between positively and negatively charged quanta. This was illustrated with the analogy of Velcro, in which hooks react ever so lightly with other hooks while hoops don't react with other hoops. This in turn was used to explain why protons are larger than electrons.

Since positive quanta react lightly with each other, we get that a collision between two positively charged neutrinos will not be the completely perfect bounce that we get when two negatively charged neutrinos collide.

For two neutral bodies, we get that the following four types of collisions can happen with exact same probability. Note that all collisions except hooks on hooks produce one unit of pressure:
  • Hooks meet hoops = 1 unit of low pressure
  • Hoops meet hooks = 1 unit of low pressure
  • Hoops meet hoops = 1 unit of high pressure
  • Hooks meet hooks = 1-x unit of high pressure, where x is a tiny fraction of 1
The hooks on hooks collision produces a slightly imperfect collision, resulting in a less than perfect unit of high pressure. When we add up all the possible collisions, we get a tiny bit of low pressure.

With a sufficiently large number of collisions we get a weak attracting force.

It is this weak attracting force between neutral bodies that we refer to as gravity.

From this we see that gravity is a special case of the electric force. This in turn explains why the formula for Newton's universal law of gravity bears such a striking resemblance to Coulomb's law.

Coulomb's law is an expression for force based on net charge, while Newton's law is an expression for force based on total charge. Since inertial mass is directly related to the number of charged quanta making up protons and electrons, inertia is a perfect proxy for total charge.



Coulomb's law compared to Newton's law

In conclusion, we can say that gravity is due to a tiny imbalance in the electric force.

Anti-Gravity

The imbalance in the electric force, which we call gravity, manifests itself as a low pressure area in the aether between bodies of dielectric matter. There is a tendency for neutrinos to leave the field between such bodies.

It follows from this that the regions away from the gravitational field must experience a high pressure corresponding to the low pressure. This high pressure is the opposite of gravity. It is anti-gravity.




Gravity pulling bodies together, and anti-gravity dissipating into space

Since the space away from the gravitational field is much bigger than the field itself, the high pressure produced is dispersed to such a degree that it becomes impossible to detect in places like our solar system where astronomical bodies are fairly thinly distributed. However, in environments with a great number of astronomic bodies packed tightly together, anti-gravity should be detectable.

A good place to look for measurable anti-gravity effects would be the centre of galaxies.

Gravity and Shielding

There is no way to shield ourselves from the effect of gravity. There is no material that we can stand on to prevent our planet from pulling on us.

This is because the force of gravity is a universally attracting force. The attracting force between two bodies may be consumed in the sense that their attraction only affects the two bodies in question. However, the effect is not lost. It daisy-chains out to other bodies.

If I stand on a slab of rock, the rock “consumes” just as much gravity as it “produces”.

Every body of dielectric matter has around it a cloud of charged neutrinos. Where these clouds interact, we get a low pressure in the aether.


Gravity daisy-chaining between three bodies


Low pressure areas between bodies daisy-chain in such a way that the net effect can be calculated by treating each interaction individually, before adding them all up to get the overall effect.

Saturday, March 24, 2018

Coulomb's Law

Coulomb's law states that the force between two point charges is proportional to the product of the two charges, divided by the square of the distance between them:


Coulomb's Law

This can be explained in terms of zero-point neutrinos, as follows:
  • The density of charged neutrinos around a charged sphere falls off by the inverse square law. This can be derived directly from geometry. The surface area of a sphere increases with the square of its radius, thus reducing density by the inverse square law.
  • The probability of a collision between two charged neutrinos, one from each charged sphere, depends on the number of charged neutrinos bouncing off of them. This in turn depends on the charge on the spheres themselves. Using basic probability theory, we get that the chance of a collision is directly related to the product of the two charges.
  • The constant k is a measure of the availability of zero-point neutrinos.
From this we can explain Coulomb's law as follows:


Coulomb's Law explained

It follows from this that Coulomb's law can be seen as supporting evidence for the position that the electric force is communicated by colliding particles. 

Friday, March 23, 2018

The Electric Field

The electric force can be explained entirely in terms of zero-point neutrinos. All that is required is to give the neutrino the ability to carry a footprint of whatever charged particle it has most recently interacted with.

When a neutrino hits a hook covered quantum, its hoops get drawn out. The neutrino gets a small charge which it carries with it back into space. A neutrino that hits a hoop covered quantum will return to space with its hooks drawn out.

The space surrounding a hook covered quantum is in this way filled with neutrinos with their hoops drawn out. The space surrounding a hoop covered quantum is full of neutrinos with hooks drawn out.

When charged neutrinos hit other charged neutrinos we get one of two types of collisions:
  1. If the neutrinos carry different charges, we get an abrasive collision. The hooks and hoops latch briefly onto each other. They make a hard turn and vacate the field in between the two charged quanta. We get a low pressure in the aether.
  2. If the neutrinos carry the same charge, we get a non-abrasive collision. There is no latching onto the other neutrino. There is no hard turn. The neutrinos stay in the field between the two charged quanta. This gives us a high pressure in the aether.
Low and high pressure regions are thus created in the aether by charged surfaces.



Abrasive and non-abrasive collisions of neutrinos between charged surfaces

This explains why opposite charges attract while same charge repel.

Static Charge and Neutral Bodies


When a neutral body comes in contact with a charged body, there is attraction. This may seem strange at first glance. However, it is relatively easy to explain in terms of charged quanta.

A neutral body is only neutral in so far as it has no net charge. Everything is made up of electrons and protons, which again are made up of positive and negative quanta.

A charged surface will pull opposite charges towards it. The distribution of charges in the neutral surface becomes distorted. Attracting charges rise to the surface while repelling charges withdraw into the material.




Neutral surfaces distorted and attracted by charged surfaces

With attracting charges closer to the charged surface than repelling charges, the net effect is attraction.

Each individual section of the neutral surface experiences either attraction or repulsion due to the charged surface. However, on average, the neutrinos inside the field will be of opposite charge due to the difference in distance between repelling and attracting sub-sections of the neutral surface. The majority of neutrinos collide abrasively, leave the field and produce low pressure.

An Aether of Zero-Point Particles

There are many theories that invoke the aether in order to explain certain physical phenomena, and each theory has its own definition of what the aether is. Some theories require an aether in order to communicate energy in the form of waves. Other theories require it for other purposes.

The aether required in The Velcro Universe is one in which there is an abundance of readily available low energy photons. I chose to call these particles zero-point photons to make the point that they have so little energy that they are undetectable. They may not be completely without energy. However, for practical purposes, they can be considered to have zero energy.

Zero-point photons fly about at the speed of light, just like any other photon.

Since space is known to be full of neutrinos, also flying about at the speed of light. The aether must be a mix of photons and neutrinos.

When it comes to neutrinos, the same logic applies as to photons. The vast majority of them are undetectable. We have zero-point neutrinos as well as zero-point photons. Collectively, we can refer to these as zero-point particles.


Electron surrounded by zero-point particles

These particles interfere with their detectable counterparts as well as ordinary matter.

Zero-point particles are very small. They have no trouble tunnelling through materials. They are therefore everywhere.

They are not directly detectable, but their effects are well known to us. In their bouncing about, zero-point particles form high and low pressure regions generally referred to as the electric, magnetic, and gravitational fields.

Photons as Carriers of Energy

For a bouncing electron to go up one harmonic, it has to absorb a specific quantum of energy. To go down one harmonic, it has to release an energy quantum.

These energy quanta come in the form of photons.

In conventional physics, the photon absorbed or released is nothing more than a quantum of pure energy. It can therefore be created and destroyed whenever needed.

However, if photons are made of dielectric matter that can neither be created nor destroyed, the sudden appearance and disappearance of photons must be explained in some other way. There has to be a pool of photons available for the energy transfer.

Low energy photons must be everywhere present so that they can be kicked up in energy. However, they must not be so abundant that the energy transfer always happen immediately after an electron has been excited into a higher energy level.

The low energy photons have to be at a certain abundance corresponding to the typical time it takes for an excited electron to stay excited before returning to its lower energy level.

The process of excitement into a higher energy level, followed by the subsequent drop to a lower energy level will have to go as follows:
  1. A random high energy photon hits a bouncing electron.
  2. A quantum of energy is transferred from the photon to the electron.
  3. The electron bounces at a higher harmonic.
  4. A random low energy photon hits the excited electron.
  5. A quantum of energy is transferred from the electron to the photon.
  6. The electron bounces at a lower harmonic.
The time delay between step 2 and step 5 is determined by the availability of photons.


Electron of Neon being excited by an incoming high energy photon: step 1, 2 and 3


Exited electron of Neon kicking a random low energy photon up in energy: step 4, 5 and 6

For this to work, there must be a lot more photons around than is observed. They would have to be everywhere, and the vast majority of them would have to be in an undetectable state.

In short, we require an aether.

The Bouncing Electron

Assuming that things are perfectly elastic at the subatomic level, an electron incapable of escaping the electric field of a proton will not come to rest at its surface. It will bounce. With no energy added to the electron, it will be stuck in limbo. It will neither combine with the proton to form a neutron nor escape into space.

The electron clouds that surround atomic nuclei are manifestations of this. Every cloud corresponds to a bouncing electron.



Atomic nucleus with net charge of 10, surrounded by 10 bouncing electrons = Neon

For atoms with more than two protons in their nuclei, there is not enough room for all of the electrons to bounce directly off the nucleus. Only two electrons can do this. Additional electrons bounce off of the electric field of the electrons closer to the nucleus. These electrons are attracted by the nucleus, but repelled by their fellow electrons.

The inner electrons are not free to bounce at any random frequency. They have to bounce at a frequency that resonates with the nucleus. Only specific harmonics are allowed.

The electrons farther out are in turn bound by the frequencies of the electrons closer to the nucleus. All the electrons are therefore bound directly or indirectly to the resonant frequencies allowed by the nucleus.

This is why electron clouds come in a limited number of allowed energy states.

Four Stable Particles

Of the six particles so far described in terms of Morton Spears' particle quanta, only four are stable. The neutron cannot exist for long outside atomic nuclei, and the positron will quickly find an electron to combine with to produce a photon.

While positrons are highly reactive, combining readily with electrons, neutrons simply fall apart.

The only subatomic particles that are stable enough to exist freely in nature are:
  • Proton = 2177 charged quanta in the open state (1089 positive and 1088 negative)
  • Electron = 3 charged quanta in the open state (1 positive and 2 negative)
  • Photon = 6 charged quanta in the closed state (3 positive and 3 negative)
  • Neutrino = 1 neutral quantum in the closed state


Proton, electron, photon and neutrino

The Velcro Universe does not require a neutron, and does not treat it as a fundamental particle. Instead, it is considered a composite. It is a proton with an electron attached to it.

The fact that the proton is incapable of holding onto the electron is very telling. It indicates that the electric force, supposedly very strong in the close vicinity of a proton, isn't really there. A proton cannot hold onto an electron for much more than fifteen minutes.

A stray electron hitting a lone proton will not produce a neutron. The electron will bounce. If the electron has sufficient energy to escape the pull of the proton, it will disappear into space. If not, the electron will be pulled back down to the proton for another bounce.

Sticky Light

A recent discovery at MIT further supports the idea that photons may be dielectric, and capable of a phase shift into massive matter.

Researchers found that photons can stick together into pairs and triplets when passed through a cloud of ultracold rubidium atoms.

The structures formed had mass, and were therefore slowed down a lot. They moved at a speed 100,000 times slower than ordinary light.

The light appears to have gone through a phase shift, similar to that observed for electron-positron pair production. However, in this case, we got the additional effect of photons latching onto each other to create structure.



Quasi-stable matter produced from light

Light was, as it were, condensed into matter.

This discovery, made known to me several months after I wrote The Velcro Universe, fits my theory remarkably well.

The discovery that photons can be made to stick together goes a long way towards proving that photons are dielectric. After all, it is in the nature of dielectric matter to interact and form structures.

Electron-Positron Pair Production

Gamma-ray photons are known to spontaneously produce electron-positron pairs when in close proximity of massive atomic nuclei. At the exact moment that a gamma-ray disappears, an electron-positron pair appears.

The standard explanation for this is that virtual electron-positron pairs get transformed into real electron-positron pairs by gamma-rays when inside the strong electric fields of massive atomic nuclei.

However, the spontaneous appearance of an electron-positron pair can just as well be explained as a transformation of the photon itself. If the photon is a compact dielectric configuration consisting of a positive orb and a negative orb, we got all the components required to explain the spontaneous appearance of electron-positron pairs.



Gamma-ray photon producing an electron-positron pair

We already know that the electron is a configuration of 1 positive quantum and 2 negative quanta.

A positron has the exact same mass as an electron, but with a positive charge. It must therefore consist of 1 negative quantum and 2 positive quanta.

All together we get 3 positive quanta and 3 negative quanta spontaneously appearing from the gamma-ray photon. A photon is therefore constituted of 3 positive and 3 negative quanta.

We can now add the positron and the photon to our list of particles explained entirely in terms of Morton Spears' particle quanta:
  • Proton = 2177 charged quanta in the open state (1089 positive and 1088 negative)
  • Neutron = 2180 charged quanta in the open state (1090 positive and 1090 negative)
  • Electron = 3 charged quanta in the open state (1 positive and 2 negative)
  • Positron = 3 charged quanta in the open state (2 positive and 1 negative)
  • Neutrino = 1 neutral quantum in the closed state
  • Photon = 6 charged quanta in the closed state (3 positive and 3 negative)
Note that the two particles made up of quanta in the closed state both move at the speed of light.

An intriguing conclusion that can be drawn from the above line of reasoning is that photons can be transformed into massive matter through physical manipulations.

When sufficiently stressed, gamma-rays pop like popcorn in a microwave oven. They undergo a phase transition from photon to an electron and a positron.

Conversely, we get that an electron that encounters a positron will spontaneously “annihilate” into a gamma-ray photon. This too is well documented in laboratory experiments. However, with our alternative perspective, nothing disappears. The electron-positron pair is not turned into “pure energy”. It is merely popped back into a photon.

The Dielectric Photon

The electromagnetic phenomena of visible light, radio waves, gamma-rays and the like, are generally ascribed to the photon, a tiny massless particle capable of carrying energy.

Since Morton Spears' neutral quantum is assigned to the neutrino, the photon has to be made of an equal number of positive and negative charged quanta.

The photon has to be dielectric.


Electron, neutrino and dielectric photon

The fact that photons are much smaller than electrons, and without inertial mass, implies that the quanta involved are in a compact massless state.

For photons to be made of the exact same type of quanta as electrons and protons, Morton Spears' quanta will have to come in two states, one small and compact, and the other large and bloated.

The quanta making up electrons and protons must be in an open state while the quanta making up the photon are in a closed state.

Quanta in the open state, are large, with inertia. Quanta in the closed state are small, with no inertia.

Photons are thus made up of an equal number of positively and negatively charge quanta in the closed state.

As for the exact composition of the photon, it can be derived from the well known phenomenon of electron-positron pair production.

Keeping Things Together

With the exception of the neutrino, all of Morton Spears' particles are composed of three or more particle quanta, and an idea struck me immediately regarding this.

Morton Spears' quanta must have some sort of texture to them so that they can stick together.

Allowing for this, the strong force that holds atomic nuclei together can be explained entirely in terms of texture. The short reach of the strong force corresponds to the short reach of the textures covering each quantum.


Furthermore, if these textures are such that positive quanta are slightly more reactive than negative ones, then the puzzling difference in size between the electron and the proton can be explained. Protons are larger than electrons because positive quanta are a tiny bit more reactive than negative ones.



Electron, proton and neutron

For the purpose of illustration, we can use Velcro as an analogy for the two types of textures involved. We can assign hooks to positive quanta and a hoops to negative quanta.

Anyone that has played with Velcro knows that while hoops do not react with other hoops, hooks do react ever so slightly with other hooks. There is a tiny imbalance in reactivity between hooks and hoops.

As for neutral quanta, I came to the conclusion that they would have to have a surface covered in hooks and hoops in equal measures. This would allow them to interact weakly with both electrons and protons.

The point here is not that these quanta are covered in Velcro. The precise nature of the quanta is irrelevant. The point to note is that they have surface features, and that they stick together in ways that are reminiscent of Velcro.

Morton Spears' Proton, Neutron, Electron and Neutrino

Morton Spears arrived at his particle quanta by comparing the mass of a proton to that of a neutron. The mass of these two particles differ by a ratio of 2177 to 2180. From this, he concluded that a proton is made up of 1089 positive quanta and 1088 negative quanta, and that the neutron is made up of 1090 positive and 1090 negative quanta.

This gives the proton a net charge of 1 and the neutron a net charge of 0.

The total number of charged particles gives us the mass of the proton and the neutron. The net sum of charged particles give us their overall charge.

Since the neutrino has no mass, we do not know how many neutrinos may take part in the construction of a proton or neutron. However, we do know that a free neutron will decay into a proton, an electron and a neutrino in about 15 minutes when taken out of an atomic nucleus.



Free neutron decay

This tells us that the difference of 3 quanta between the neutron and the proton must be the charged quanta making up the electron.

The electron is therefore made up of 2 negative quanta and 1 positive quantum. We do not know the role of the neutrino in this. But as far as mass is concerned we know the number of charged quanta making up the neutron, the proton and the electron.

The neutrino is very small. It is therefore reasonable to assume that it is made up of a single neutral quantum.

To summarize, we got the following:
  • Proton = 1089 positive quanta + 1088 negative quanta (a total of 2177)
  • Neutron = 1090 positive quanta + 1090 negative quanta (a total of 2180)
  • Electron = 1 positive quantum + 2 negative quanta (a total of 3)
  • Neutrino = 1 neutral quantum

Morton Spears' Particle Quanta

In my theory, I use the simple model of the subatomic proposed by Morton Spears in his second book on gravity, published in 1993.

The reason for this is that it is the simplest model I could find that suits the purpose of my physics. Nothing more elaborate is required.

Morton Spears' model is much simpler than standard physicists. Morton Spears does not invoke a large array of Quarks, Leptons and Bosons. Instead he makes the proposition that the subatomic is made up of three indivisible particle quanta. One is negatively charged, the other is positively charged, and the third is neutral.



Morton Spears' 3 particle quanta

An objection to this simple alternative to standard theory is that we have evidence to suggest that Quarks, Lepton and Bosons are real. However, the evidence can just as well be used to defend Morton Spears. All that is observed is that when atoms are smashed together with great force, they break apart. A large number of short lived particles appear before promptly recombining into something more stable. Nothing is proved beyond the fact that atoms are made up of a large number of smaller parts.

Choosing conventional particle physics over Morton Spears' model would merely complicate things as far as my particular theory is concerned. I chose therefore to go with Morton Spears, and since nothing turned up in which I would require Quarks, Leptons or Bosons, I stuck with his model.

Universe of Particles

A year has passed since I published two short books on physics in which I used a strict particle model to explain the physical world we live in. In this model, nothing happens without direct physical interaction. There is no action at a distance. Everything that exists is an assembly of particles. Every force is due to particles colliding and interacting.

The books, titled The Velcro Universe and The Velcro Cosmos outline a physical model that can be used to explain a whole range of physical phenomena. The Velcro Universe covers, electricity, magnetism, gravity, optics, and the atom. The Velcro Cosmos covers space, time, inertia and energy.



Both books were hastily written. They contain no elaborations and no excuses. The physics is laid out without explaining the wider context. My aim was solely to show that it would work, and as such the two books are still relevant. However, there are some minor errors and misrepresentations. There are also quite a few things that could do with some elaboration.

With the dust now settled from my initial excitement, I feel that time has come to write a revised version of my two books. I will elaborate on my thinking and explain more fully why the model is the way it is, and how it can be used to explain the observed universe.

My aim is not to make the reader a true believer in my theory. I do not believe in “settled science”. That goes as much for this theory as any other. Rather than settling on a single theory as being the one and only true representation of reality, I want to see people open up to the idea that the world can be described in many ways, and that all the different ways deserve equal attention and scrutiny.

Settling on a single idea only serves to restrict the mind. As Aristotle once said, it is the mark of an educated mind to entertain a thought without accepting it. The thought I want the reader to entertain throughout this book is the idea that everything we know can be derived from three basic particle quanta, empty space, and a handful of rules to fuse it all together.

Thursday, March 22, 2018

The Origin of Norse Mythology

According to Norse mythology, a demon wolf called Fenrir is the cause of earthquakes. He is the brother of Jörmungandr, the demon serpent responsible for tsunamis and giant waves. Their sister is Hel, the queen of the under-world where the soles of those who die without honor reside. Their father is Loki, the god of mischief.

Odin und Fenriswolf Freyr und Surt.jpg
Odin and Fenris

By Emil Doepler - Doepler, Emil. ca. 1905. Walhall, die Götterwelt der Germanen. Martin Oldenbourg, Berlin. Page 55. Photographed and cropped by User:Haukurth., Public Domain, Link

When time comes for Ragnarok, the great battle between giants and gods, Loki and his children join the battle at the side of the giants.

Ragnarok ends in total destruction with enormous casualties on both sides and no clear winner. However, from the ashes of destruction rises a new land. The surviving gods and demons retreat to their respective realms, and the cycle starts all over again.

All of this makes logical sense. In a world where everything repeats, we would expect nothing less.

However, the importance of Fenrir in all of this is rather odd, because Scandinavia is not a geological active region. There are hardly ever any earthquakes in Scandinavia. The nearest place with earthquakes and active volcanoes is Iceland which did not get settled before year 800, long after Norse mythology became the dominant religion in Scandinavia.

This indicates that Norse mythology did not originate in Scandinavia, but in a place where earthquakes and tsunamis are more common.

This comes in addition to the rather telling similarities between Ragnarok and the Toba catastrophe, and the curious importance of dwarfs in Voluspo, the poem in which Ragnarok is described.

Also, Naglfar, the demon ship made out of dead men's nails, sails across the ocean from the east.

There is a large body of water to the east of Sweden. However, there are no volcanoes on the Russian side of this sea, and Ragnarok ends with a massive volcanic eruption.

Baltic Sea map.png


The Baltic Sea is a very bad match for the description given in Voluspo. There are neither volcanoes nor earthquakes and tsunamis in the region.

A far better match is the Indian Ocean, where earthquakes and tsunamis, centered around Indonesia to the east, are more common.

Indian Ocean-CIA WFB Map.png

By United States Central Intelligence Agency
The World Factbook, Public Domain, Link

That would place the origin of Norse mythology in Indochina, the east coast of India or the western islands of Indonesia.

Tuesday, March 20, 2018

Free Neutron Decay and the Bouncing Electron

A neutron, separated from an atomic nucleus, will decay into a proton, an electron and an anti-neutrino within 15 minutes.
The reason for this is not entirely clear. However, whatever the reason is, it is interesting to note that the electron manages to escape the proton.

This indicates that a proton is not able to hold onto an electron residing on its surface.

A stray electron that happens to bump into a lone proton will not stick onto it, but bounce.

We know this to be true, because a proton cannot be made into a neutron by smashing an electron into it. Once a free neutron has decayed into a proton and an electron, it cannot be put back together again.

If the stray electron mentioned above lacks the energy to escape the electric field of the lone proton, it will fall back onto the proton. It will bounce again. Still not able to escape the proton, there will be another bounce, and this will continue for ever as long as no energy is added to the electron.

Since we can assume things to be perfectly elastic at the subatomic, the bounce will be completely free of friction or any other type of energy loss. The bounce will also synchronize with the harmonic frequency of the proton.

We get an electron furiously bouncing off of the proton, precisely as described in my book on physics.
The fact that the free neutron is unable to hang onto the electron that it emits can be taken as supporting evidence for the bouncing electron model of the atom.

Sunday, March 18, 2018

The Nonexistence of Antimatter

The positron, which features prominently in The Velcro Universe is an anti-particle. When combined with an electron, it turns into radiation, in the form of a gamma-ray photon.

PositronDiscovery.jpg

By Carl D. Anderson (1905–1991) - Anderson, Carl D. (1933).
"The Positive Electron".
Physical Review 43 (6): 491–494. DOI:10.1103/PhysRev.43.491.,
Public Domain, Link

The conventional interpretation of this is that matter is converted into energy. However, this requires a bit of magic in which matter can be created or destroyed.

This is not how things work in The Velcro Universe. All that happens is that one type of matter is converted into another type of matter. There is a face shift, but no creation or annihilation. All that happens when an electron and a positron meet is that they combine into forming a photon.

The phase shift involves a dramatic reduction in size and an increase in speed to match the required speed of light. The energy of the electron and positron is exactly equal to the energy of the resulting photon.

This position has support in resent experimental findings in which photons were made to stick onto each other. This indicates that photons are dielectric in nature.

The Velcro Universe does not allow for the creation or destruction of matter. The production of photons are not due to annihilation of matter, but due to a face shift.

Similarly, the annihilation of a neutrino and an anti-neutrino does not magically remove these particles from the universe. When such particles meet, they equal out their charge, which makes them undetectable. The energy released is transferred to a nearby zero-point photon, which becomes sufficiently energized to be detected. Again, energy is conserved.

In the case of anti-protons and anti-atoms, produced in laboratories under extreme conditions, we are dealing with extremely unstable particles. When these interact with normal matter, they disintegrate into radiation. Such particles, being quite large, will generate hundreds of gamma-ray photons when they fall apart.

Universe of Particles

This will be the title of my upcoming book on physics, in which I will join my two original books into a single volume.

The result will be a thoroughly revised text. Things will be better defined. Inconsistencies will be weeded out, and there will be more in the way of supporting evidence for the overall theory.

Those interested in receiving a free copy when I'm done can contact me at fredrik_nygaard@hotmail.com.


Chapters will be published on this blog as soon as they are ready. The interested reader can follow my work as I progress. Feedback and comment are always welcome.

Friday, March 16, 2018

Jupiter in Labor?

According to legend, Jupiter has given birth to numerous children, including Venus. This is interpreted by Electric Universe proponents as real physical events. The planet Jupiter gave birth to its moons, and to Venus which managed to escape Jupiter's gravitational field to become an independent planet of the solar system.

The physics behind this is that all planets, and large planets in particular, become electrically stressed from time to time, and that they split off some of their mass in order to reduce the stress. Since the surface areas of two spheres are larger than a single sphere made out of the same amount of matter, the electrical tension experienced by two spheres will be less than that experienced by the single body before the split.

Seen in this perspective, the fact that Jupiter's great red spot is becoming smaller, rounder and taller, is particularly interesting. Could it be that Jupiter is about to give birth to a new moon, or planet?

Great Red Spot From Voyager 1.jpg

By NASA
Public Domain, Link

At present, the red spot is about the size of Earth. Like all storms, it has a low pressure area in the middle. The bulk of its matter is located away from the center.

If this is the way planets and moons are formed, then we can expect them to have large and diffuse cores, just like Jupiter itself.

Personally, I find it interesting that the great spot on Jupiter is red. It indicates that it may be rich in iron and other minerals. If the storm is mineral rich, like a sand-storm, the planet produced may indeed be a rock planet or moon. This would fit the observed evidence very well. Small planets and moons are spherical rocks. Only the larger ones have an atmosphere.

From legends, it is also possible to derive the possible consequences of a birthing planet. Saturn consumed most of its children immediately after birth. However, this did not end well for Saturn, which ultimately split into two, forming Jupiter in the process.

If Jupiter is in the process of giving birth, the likelihood that this will happen relatively soon is in fact quite good. We are entering a grand solar minimum. This will cause storms to intensify, not only on Earth, but on all the planets in our solar system. A laboring Jupiter is therefore about to get an extra push. Maybe sufficient to expel its red spot from its body.

Thursday, March 15, 2018

Electron Clouds and Pilot Waves

In my blog post on the Pilot Wave Theory, I pointed out how well this idea fits the ideas laid out in my book on physics. The way I explain the Double Slit Experiment fits the Pilot Wave Theory exactly.

ExperimentCouder-Young.png

By Krauss - Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0, Link

However, the Double Slit Experiment is not the only phenomenon that the Pilot Wave Theory can explain. The curious shape of the electron clouds around atomic nuclei can also be explained by this theory.

Electrons bouncing off of a nucleus will have a pilot wave accompanying them, just as much as a free electron moving through the ether. However, the pilot wave accompanying a bouncing electrons is not merely a disturbance. The ether surrounding the electron will oscillate in harmony with the bounce of the electrons. The atom, and its surrounding ether becomes an oscillating whole.



The electron clouds are not the electrons themselves, but the electrons and their surrounding oscillating ether.

For large atoms, with multiple layers of surrounding electrons, we get a complex hierarchy of oscillating, mutually repelling clouds, that are all attracted to the positively charged atomic nucleus.

An ether made up of low energy neutrinos and photons, as suggested in my book, would explain all of this.

Such an ether can explain the electrical force, the magnetic force, the double slit experiment and the electron clouds around atomic nuclei.

Wednesday, March 14, 2018

Chemical Bonds

In my book on physics, published half a year ago, I made the suggestion that electrons are bouncing off of the nuclei of atoms, and that this explains the electron clouds.

Unfortunately, I also made an erroneous suggestion when it comes to chemical bonds. The tiny imbalance in the electrical force, which is responsible for gravity, has nothing to do with chemistry. Chemistry can be explained in its entirety in terms of the bouncing electron, and energy levels associated with various harmonics.

A chemical bond between two atoms happen when their electrons find a resonant frequency that allow them to bounce in between the atomic nuclei involved.

When two hydrogen atoms find each other to form a hydrogen molecule, the two electrons in the combination find a resonant frequency in which they bounce alternatively off one an the other atomic nucleus.


Image taken from:

The electrons become trapped, as it were, between the two hydrogen nuclei. They bounce off of both in resonant harmony.

The inner shell of any atom can hold no more than 2 electrons. This means that larger atoms, such as carbon and oxygen, have several layers of electron clouds. While the inner layer holds no more than two electrons, the outer layers can hold up to 8 electrons each.

Atoms that have these layers filled to perfection do not form chemical bonds because there are no way to produce the sort of resonant jumping back and forth between the atoms. These are the so called noble gases, of which helium and neon are two examples.

All other elements can form chemical bonds.

When a chemical bond is formed, there is first a need to synchronize the electrons involved. There is some pushing and jockeying required. This is the so called energy hill or activation energy.


Image taken from:

Once the activation energy is overcome, a chemical bond is formed.

If the resulting combination has a more optimal configuration of the electrons than before the reaction, energy is released. If it is less optimal, energy is consumed. In the above diagram we have heat being released, provided we read it from left to right. If we read the diagram from right to left, we have energy being consumed.

Going from left to right, we have an exothermic reaction. Going from right to left we have an endothermic reaction.

In the case of water, we know that the production of it from hydrogen and oxygen molecules is an exothermic reaction. The reaction is explosive. It produces a lot of heat. Conversely, producing hydrogen and oxygen from water requires energy and is therefore endothermic.


Image taken from:

The force that binds these molecules together is nothing more exotic than the electrical force. The electrons are attracted to more than one atomic nucleus. When these electrons find ways to resonate between the atoms, they do so. The more optimal the resonances are, the stronger are the chemical bonds formed.