The Casimir Effect

The Casimir effect is a weak force, usually attractive, that acts between two neutral surfaces in close proximity to each other.

The existence of this force was predicted in 1948 by the dutch physicist Hendrik Casimir.

From quantum field theory, Hendrik Casimir concluded that two neutral surfaces would attract each other due to the limited number of wavelengths that can exist in an enclosed space. With fewer wavelengths existing in the space between the surfaces than what can exist in the surrounding space, the energy density of the enclose space would be less. The energy density of the surrounding space would therefore result in pressure on the plates, forcing them together.

Using the formulas found in quantum field theory, the force can be calculated to be infinitely strong. It was therefore a bit of a surprise to discover that the force was in fact quite weak, and can at times be repelling.

Hendrik Casimir's prediction was correct as far as the existence of a force was concerned. The actual measurements confirmed the existence of something real going on at the zero-point level. But it could hardly be seen as a validation of quantum field theory.

A number of alternative explanations have therefore been proposed. There is a purely relativistic solution, based on the van der Waals force, and there is a coupled ground-state energy solution.

The phenomenon can also be explained in terms of a strict particle model in which there is an aether of zero-point particles.

An electron in an aether of zero-point particles

We can imagine two neutral plates that act as shields, restricting the entry of zero-point particles into the space between them.

Such shields would be far from perfect. Zero-point particles are very small, and have little trouble tunneling through materials. However, some particles will bounce off of atoms in the shields. There will be an overall shielding effect.

This results in an imbalance in the ease with which zero-point particles can enter and leave the enclosed space. The easiest way will always be through the sides where there are no shields.

However, when the opening to the sides get very narrow, only zero-point particles coming in from a very restricted angle are allowed into the enclosed space the easy way. Most of the particles will have to go through the shields.

On the other hand, zero-point particles inside the enclosed space may have little trouble finding their way out. If they come in from the openings, they quickly find their way out again. If they came in through the shields, they may bounce a few times before leaving. On average, the exit may be easier to find than the entrance. The net result of this would be an attracting force.

Such a situation is very similar to various types of traps. In cases where the exit is easier to find than the entry, there will be a general vacancy inside the enclosed space, corresponding to an attracting force. In cases where the exit is harder to find than the entry, there will be a build up of pressure, corresponding to a repelling force.

Galactic Super-Waves

When studying the ice core measurements of Greenland and the Antarctic, we notice an interesting pattern. Earth's climate appears to repeat in great cycles of about 120.000 years.

Each cycle starts with a rapid heating period, followed by a peak that wanes off towards colder conditions. The peak lasts about 20,000 years, the waning period lasts about 100,000 years, and the rapid heating period lasts about 2,000 years or less.

We are currently about 8,000 years into the peak of the current cycle. The overall trend going forward can therefore be expected to be that of cooling towards a minimum some 100,000 years into the future, after which there will be another spike in temperatures.

The Scandinavian ice sheet can be expected to return as well as the great North American ice sheet. However, the return of these ice sheets will be relatively slow. There will be plenty of time to adapt for both humans and wildlife.

The difficult part to overcome in these great climatic cycles is the rapid heating. The sudden disappearance of the Scandinavian and North American ice sheets some 8000 years ago coincided with the greatest mass extinction seen on our planet in a very long time.

Large animals with habitats close to the great ice sheets were especially hard hit. A great number of species disappeared altogether. Animals closer to the equator were less severely hit.

The sudden disappearance of the ice sheets that had taken some 100,000 years to accumulate appears to have had a severe impact on the nearby fauna, and it does not take a whole lot of imagination to understand why.

The sheer speed of ice melting must have caused enormous floods of the nearby landscape. The rapid heating of the atmosphere would have had animals move up closer to the ice sheets, making the floods all the more destructive.

Everywhere on our planet, there would be severe climate changes, but nowhere would these changes have been as dramatic as in the vicinity of the ice sheets.

What is clear from all of this is that our planet underwent dramatic climate change some 8000 years ago, and that the consequences of this were disastrous. It is also clear from ice core data that this happens on a regular basis.

Something heats up our planet every 120,000 years or so, only to let it cool back down before the next burst. There is something pulsating, almost like a heart beat.

Seeking to explain all of this, Paul La Violette has in his work pointed out that many galaxies exhibit great energetic behavior. Great bursts of radiation, usually emanating from the core of galaxies, are quite common to see.

It is therefore reasonable to believe that all galaxies do this from time to time. In the case of our own galaxy, this appears to be happening every 120,000 years.

Paul La Violette call these bursts of energy galactic super-waves. They heat up the environment as they progress radially from the center of galaxies. Stars flare up as a consequence. Planets are shocked into convulsion, with the polar regions getting especially hard hit as coronal mass ejections from their host stars are caught up in the magnetic fields around their poles.

The galactic super-wave theory can easily explain the rapid melting of ice sheets, and the mass extinction that was especially severe at the fringes of these ice sheets.

It can also explain the origin of ancient myths in which there are great floods and fire raining from the sky.

It gives plausibility to the theory that Venus was ejected from Jupiter at roughly the same time. The source of the energy required to eject Venus out and away from Jupiter's gravitational pull is no longer a mystery.

The ejection of Venus from Jupiter

It can even explain why the color blue is never mentioned in ancient documents. Before the galactic super-wave, our sun may have been red in color, and blue was therefore indistinguishable form green and purple. The age before the super-wave may indeed have been a golden one.

And finally, we may have an explanation as to why megalithic building techniques were abandoned around this same time. The intense radiation associated with the super-wave, may have resulted in a rapid speeding up of mass condensation, increasing gravity and inertia, and possibly even changing the chemical characteristics of certain elements.

Megalithic and polygonal stonework became impossible, not because of a loss of civilization, but because of a change in the physical environment.

In the space of a few generations, things that were quite reasonable, and even easy to do, became impossibilities. To the people caught up in all of this, it must have seemed like everyone was getting weaker. Stories of the past must have seemed magical. Not only was everything golden, people were fantastically strong and agile as well.

Extraterrestrials

The Tardigrade is a microscopic eight-legged creature capable of surviving the vacuum of space. They are found everywhere: from mountain tops to the deep sea and mud volcanoes; from tropical rain forests to the Antarctic.

Tardigrade

By Schokraie E, Warnken U, Hotz-Wagenblatt A, Grohme MA, Hengherr S, et al. (2012) - Schokraie E, Warnken U, Hotz-Wagenblatt A, Grohme MA, Hengherr S, et al. (2012) Comparative proteome analysis of Milnesium tardigradum in early embryonic state versus adults in active and anhydrobiotic state. PLoS ONE 7(9): e45682. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0045682, CC BY 2.5, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=22716809

This tells us that if Earth were to be hit by a cataclysm in which a part of our crust was thrown out into space, some Tardigrades may find themselves as involuntary astronauts. A small portion of these may later find themselves on a moon of Jupiter or some other place not too hostile to life.

Assuming that these creatures can shut themselves down biologically for decades, or even thousands of years, they may find themselves alive and well at their destination where they resume their life functions.

These brave survivors of space travel can then be properly termed extraterrestrials.

This same logic can of course be reversed.

A cataclysm on a distant planet throws up a bunch of dirt and water full of primitive life forms. This muddy mess is sprayed everywhere into space, some of it directed towards Earth. Frozen solid in the vacuum of space, the organisms carried along for the ride survive for millions of years.

On arrival at Earth, the ecosystem of microorganisms that was blown into space comes to life once more.

In the hospitable climate of a young Earth there is an abundance of available space for the organisms, and we get an explosion of life. The Cambrian explosion may well have happened this way.

On a later date, when there is already an abundance of life on Earth, a similar arrival of newcomers may cause great trouble. The newcomers may kill off certain species in favor of their own survival. Viruses and bacteria may cause plagues that kill a large number of original inhabitants.

It is in this respect interesting to note that plagues and severe virus infections tend to happen when solar activity is low. In times when the magnetic shield around our planets is at its weakest, more stuff from outer space finds its way to Earth. Severe weather, volcanic eruptions, earth quakes, famines, disease and general misery tend to go hand in hand. History books are full of stories in which these things happen together.

The Black Death is a good example of this. It killed off 50 to 70% of humankind in the late middle ages. Interestingly, this disease was associated with obnoxious fumes, asteroids and comets. The chronicles would not have mentioned this if this was merely a general observation of conditions at the times. The mention of these things as harbingers of death and destruction must have been due to their appearance ahead of subsequent events.

The Black Death may well have been a strand of extraterrestrial bacteria for which the human immune system was particularly badly prepared.

It appears then that primitive organisms, from viruses and bacteria to the Tardigrade, permeate the universe. When raining down on young planets, they kick-start processes necessary for more complex life forms to appear. In established ecosystems, they can wreck havoc, killing off large portions of the population.

Assuming that Venus is a fairly recent newcomer to our solar system, we can expect the seeding process to start shortly, if it has not already started. The thick and hot atmosphere may be turned into something less lethal quicker than expected. The time required for Venus to become relatively hospitable to life may not be millions of years into the future, but more like thousands of years.

With deliberate seeding from our part, we may even be able to influence the development of Venus in a direction that is particularly welcoming to us. Human colonies on Venus may appear in a not too distant future.

The fact that our own planet is expanding indicates that it may be getting close to the end of its optimal period. Moving to a new and fresh planet is then the intelligent thing to do. There's certainly no harm in establishing a colony on Venus should conditions open for this.

However, there will eventually come a time when our whole region of the Milky Way galaxy will become inhospitable to life. Assuming that matter becomes increasingly heavy and radioactive over time, eventually collapsing into radiation, humankind will have to move far away in order to avoid the catastrophe.

The intelligent thing to do in an eternal universe where matter evolves in great life-cycles is to be perpetually on the move from less hospitable places to more hospitable places.

We can therefore expect extraterrestrials with intelligence comparable or above our own to move from time to time. After a few thousand or million years, they move on to other places, establish colonies and branch out.

This opens for the possibility that intelligent extraterrestrials have in fact been visiting Earth in the past. They may have been here for a while, and then decided to go somewhere else. Chances are that Earth is past its prime when it comes to being hospitable to life. The visitors may have known this and decided to leave while they still could.

Newton's Cradle

The strict particle model presented in my book on physics makes no distinction between the quantum level and macro level when it comes to motion.

For example, electrons do not magically hover in cloud formations around atomic nuclei. They bounce up and down in harmonic resonance with the nuclei.

This means that we can use classical physics to explain the subatomic. This requires an aether and a few special rules when it comes to the exact structure of subatomic particles, but nothing too outrageous. There is no need for anything completely new or unheard of.

The study of motion at the macro level becomes the same as the study of motion at the subatomic. Experiments performed by Galileo Galilei and Isaac Newton can be directly applied to our thinking about the subatomic.

An interesting setup in this respect is Newton's cradle which illustrates how energy is propagated from one object to another.

By DemonDeLuxe (Dominique Toussaint)

Image:Newtons cradle animation book.gif, CC BY-SA 3.0, Link

In our mind's eye, we can scale this setup down to the molecular or subatomic. We can imagine the cradle to be a line up of molecules, or part of the surface of an atomic nucleus.

When such a setup is hit by an incoming object, energy propagates through it like a pressure wave. We can imagine the subatomic particles involved being inflated and subsequently deflated as the wave progresses through the setup.

The last particle in the setup will be hit by the full force of the energy wave. If free to move, it escapes the setup. If securely fastened, the energy wave rushes back again.

We can imagine a molecule vibrating for a long time after a direct hit. We can equally easily imagine the surface of an atomic nucleus oscillating at a given frequency after being hit by an energetic electron.

As for the macro setup of Newton's cradle itself, we can imagine each steel ball as enormous molecules. The pressure wave resulting from the first steel ball hitting the next expands through each ball before concentrating all energy at a point directly at the other side, at the exact point where the neighboring ball lies at rest. Energy is in this manner transferred from one ball to the other.

What happens at the subatomic is exactly the same as what is happening at the macro level. Energy is transferred from one object to another in a wavelike manner, and it is the time delay in doing this that we generally refer to as inertia.

If two perfectly elastic objects of identical inertia collide, one being in motion and the other at rest, all kinetic energy is moved from the incoming object to the target object. This is because the time delay required for the transfer is identical for the two objects.

However, if the incoming object has more inertia than the target, the incoming object will have too little time to transfer all its energy to the target. The target is thus put in motion without completely stopping the incoming object.

If the incoming object has less inertia than the target, we get the same problem, but with opposite effect. The incoming object hits the larger and more sluggish object. The time required to distribute energy through the larger object is too long for the smaller incoming object. Only a small percentage of the energy is therefore transferred. The smaller object bounces back out the way it came, with only a portion of its energy transferred to the larger object.

This is why bullets do not slow down very much as they cut through the air. Even if the total weight of the air between a gun and its target is more than the weight of the bullet, each air molecule is so tiny that they do not have the time to absorb much energy.

Things of vastly different inertia, or energy level, do not interact strongly with each other. There is a mismatch in time delay for strong interaction to occur. This in turn, explains why zero-point particles interact strongly with each other and weakly with their energetic counterparts.

The Weight of the Proton

The proton has been measured and found lacking in weight. The difference between the expected weight and the measured weight was a full three standard deviations, which means that the proton was substantially lighter than previously thought.

At first glance, this may seem like little more than a curiosity. However, the implications of this when it comes to theories related to nuclear fusion and stars are significant.

According to the standard solar model, stars are fueled by hydrogen fusion in a super dense and super hot core. Mass of single protons are turned into heat through a process in which four protons and two electrons are fused together to produce helium.

Atomic nuclei of hydrogen, deuterium, helium, lithium and beryllium

This is a two step process, in which energy is spent in order to fuse two and two protons together to form deuterium, followed by a release of energy when two and two deuterium atoms are fused together to form helium.

The overall process is believed to be exothermic.

However, with the proton substantially smaller in mass than originally thought, the energy that can be released through fusion is smaller as well.

This follows directly from the famous energy equation E = mc². If the mass of the proton is smaller, the energy associated with it is correspondingly smaller.

This means that the process of fusing two protons together to form deuterium is likely to require a lot more energy than originally thought.

The overall process of fusion, thought to take place in the core of our Sun, is suddenly lacking enormously in potential energy to draw on. It may even be the case that fusion is not an exothermic process as a whole, and that it is only the second part in which deuterium is fused together that produces an excess of energy.

This in turn opens for the possibility that we may be completely wrong about nuclear fusion and fission. Iron may not be the element above which fission is exothermic and fusion is endothermic. It may be that all fission is exothermic and all fusion is endothermic, with the only exceptions being deuterium and other rare isotopes.

The fact that single protons are much lighter than thought is a very big deal. It puts the standard model of stars into doubt, and it makes controlled hydrogen fusion a lot less likely to ever deliver on its promise of limitless free energy.

Three Energy Levels at the Subatomic

Detectable photons and neutrinos travel in straight lines. They do not interact much with each other and are largely unaffected by electromagnetic and gravitational forces.

This means that if there is an aether made up of zero-point photons and neutrinos, communicating the electrical force, the magnetic force and gravity through collisions, the zero-point particles have to behave in a different manner from their detectable counterparts.

Electron in an aeter of zero-point photons and neutrinos

There must be an energy threshold very close to zero where photons and neutrinos go from being vigorously interacting with each other to being largely indifferent to each other.

Once above this threshold, photons and neutrinos go from bouncing about as an aether, to being like bullets cutting through the aether they came from.

Keeping in mind that there is another energy threshold at the gamma-ray level where high energy photons transform into inertial matter in the form of electron-positron pairs, we end up with three distinct energy levels. They are:

1. Aether at the zero-point level
2. Energetic photons and neutrinos
3. Inertial matter

This corresponds to the three broad energy levels recognized by conventional quantum physics as:

1. Virtual particles at the zero-point level
2. Photons and neutrinos
3. Inertial matter

The main difference between the two models is that the strict particle model operates with real particles all the way, with no creation or destruction of matter, while conventional quantum physics sees a transformation from energy to matter.

In both cases, there is a phase shift taking place between point 1 and 2, and another phase shift happening between point 2 and 3.

The Eye of the Sahara

Africa has an eye that stares into space, complete with a dark pupil and blue iris. It is located in western Sahara, in the country of Mauritania. Its official name is the Rhichat Structure.

Satellite picture of the Richat Structure

By NASA/GSFC/MITI/ERSDAC/JAROS, and U.S./Japan ASTER Science Team - http://asterweb.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery-detail.asp?name=Richat, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=2974815

It was at first believed to be an impact crater. However, it does not have the kinetic shock related features associated with such craters. Instead, it has features indicating that it was produced by an even application of pressure across its 50 km diameter.

Current thinking is that it is a collapsed dome. Hot water or magma produced a circular hill which subsequently collapsed into the concentric circular structure we see today.

The thinking is that since it was not produced by a concentrated blast at the center, it must have been produced through a swelling, followed by a collapse. The possibility that an incoming meteorite may have produced an evenly distributed pressure wave does not appear to have been considered.

Any electrical considerations have almost certainly been ignored since current mainstream cosmology does not take electromagnetic forces into account when dealing with meteorites.

However, the Richat Structure has all the characteristics of an electrical event. It displays the tell tale twist of a Birkeland Current.

The structure may well be the result of a meteorite that exploded differently than normal. Instead of a pin point explosion, the object may have produced a sheet of lightning.

This would have been an extremely powerful lightning event. It may have lifted the top soil off the entire 50 km diameter area. The subsequent explosion of the meteorite would have blown the top soil to the side.

Being produced by a sheet lightning, rather than a concentrated flash, the explosion is likely to have produced a more evenly distributed pressure wave.

Such a sheet lightning would also have produced a lot of gamma rays and positrons, which is the sort of stuff required for transmutations of elements.

Electricity, heat and evenly distributed pressure would have produce electrolytic effects. Gamma rays and positrons may well have produced rare elements and isotopes as well. An unusual chemistry would be the expected result of such a cocktail of chemical and nuclear processes.

The Size of Phaeton

The total mass of the asteroid belt is approximately 4% that of our Moon, or 22% that of Pluto, and roughly twice that of Pluto's moon Charon (whose diameter is 1200 km).

This has led some to conclude that the matter making up the asteroid belt must have come from something else than an exploded planet. An alternative source often suggested, is Valles Marineris, the scar on the surface of Mars.

However, the total mass excavated from Valles Marineris is far too little to make the alternative hypothesis believable. There is also the dwarf planet Ceres, which definitely did not come from any excavation.

The matter excavated from Valles Marineris may in total have been about 4% of our Moon, but there is no way all of this found its way out to the asteroid belt. Much of it rained down on Earth in meteorite showers. The Sun and Jupiter must have gobbled up much of it too, and a lot was no doubt lost to space.

Seen in this perspective, 4% of our Moon, or 22% of Pluto sounds about right for an exploded planet the size of Mercury.

Rogue planet blowing up a smaller planet

Mercury has a volume about three times that of our Moon, which means that the asteroid belt has a total volume corresponding to about 1.5% of Mercury.

However, this assumes that planets are solid to the core. If planets are hollow, which we have good reasons to believe, the above mentioned numbers may be off by upwards of 100%. The asteroid belt may be a full 4% of Mercury. This would be especially true if the exploded planet had a particularly thin crust, making it all the more likely to have exploded.

In the case of an explosion, only the bits ejected in the direction of the planet's orbit would remain in orbit. Bits ejected in any other direction would be sent hurling out into space to be lost for ever, or gobbled up by other planets and the Sun. That would have left very little of the original planet in orbit.

The relatively small mass of the asteroid belt is therefore no reason to abandon the theory that it is the remnants of the planet Phaeton.

The Receding Moon

Our Moon is receding from us by about 3.8 cm a year. The conventional explanation for this is that the energy required to produce the tides of the Earth's oceans translates into a widening of the Moon's orbit. But if this is the only thing going on, and this has gone on for millions of years, we have a problem explaining the size of the dinosaurs.

The enormous size of the dinosaurs is by many seen as proof that gravity was less strong when they roamed the Earth. Gravity must therefore have increased over time, and the result of this should have been a tightening, rather than a widening, of our Moon's orbit.

This dilemma was first pointed out to me by Peter Woodhead, who used it as supporting evidence for his hollow Earth model.

However, Peter's calculations did not add up correctly. A big problem with his model was that it violated Newton's shell theorem and all the astronomic evidence in support of this theorem.

Convinced that Peter Woodhead was onto something, I decided to join him in his search for an explanation that would tie all the mutually contradicting evidence together into a simple theory.

The evidence compiled by Peter was as follows:

• The size of the dinosaurs indicate that gravity was at least half of what it is today
• The rate of Earth's expansion indicate a gas filled hollow at the center of our planet
• The Moon is receding in its orbit

After much consideration and speculation, I realized that the key to solving this problem is the inclusion of static charge as a major factor. By including the fact that all astronomic bodies are charged, we get a repelling force in addition to the attracting force of gravity.

Electric repulsion and gravitational attraction

This introduces stability into the solar system, it gives us reasons to believe that planets are hollow, and it explains the receding Moon. If an increase in gravity is outpaced by a corresponding increase in electrical repulsion, the net result would be a wider orbit of the Moon.

If we add to this Halton Arp's mass condensation, and the possibility that heavily charged matter may exert a stronger gravitational pull than neutral matter, we get an overall explanation that solves all the problems listed above by Peter Woodhead.

It appears then that Peter Woodhead was right about the expanding Earth, even if he was somewhat off with his initial explanation.

The Twist of the Birkeland Current

Everywhere we look in the world around us, we find spiraling patterns. The shell of the Nautilus is often used as a symbol for this. The double helix of the DNA that make up the genetic code of life is also frequently used.

Storms twist as they move. Planets spin on their axis. Galaxies rotate. Wherever there is motion or organic growth, there is a tendency for things to twist.

This goes all the way down to the subatomic where charged particles move in spiraling patterns. From the galactic to the subatomic, things twist, and the reason for this is by many presumed to be the fact that electric currents twist.

As soon as electric currents are involved, whether slow and organic or quick as a lightning, the patterns produced are almost always a spiral or a rotation of some kind.

A fine example of an electrically produced spiraling pattern can be seen in the way craters spiral around our Moon's north pole. With little else than the ion wind from the Sun to explain this, we can reasonably assume that it is the behavior of ions that has caused this pattern.

Lunar north pole

By NASA/GSFC/Arizona State University - http://wms.lroc.asu.edu/lroc_browse/view/npole (see also http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/catalog/PIA14024), Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=31697472

Each crater is circular, carved out over time by the spiraling motion of ionized dust. The craters are in turn evenly spaced out in a spiraling pattern.

The overall current that produces this pattern is called a Birkeland current, after the man who first suggested the existence of electric currents in space.

The twisting behavior of Birkeland currents is clearly visible, both in the Auroras on Earth and in the craters on our Moon, and it begs the question why electric currents behave this way.

Using the physics presented in my book, we find a prime suspect in the photon, which is modeled as a structure with two counter-spinning orbs. One orb is positively charged and the other orb is negatively charged.

This means that the aether, modeled as a mix of low energy photons and neutrinos, is awash with tiny spinning structures.

The two orb photon

Each photon can be viewed as a tiny magnet. When photons in the aether line up in a given direction, we get a magnetic field.

There is a close relationship between electric currents, represented by ions in motion, and magnetic fields. Ions in motion produce magnetic fields. Magnetic fields in motion produce currents.

Magnetic fields can also be used to rip electrons away from neutral gases. Sending electrons in one direction and the positive ion produced by the separation in the other direction, electric currents can be produced.

The interactions between electricity and magnetism are so intimate that they are often referred to by the single word electromagnetism. However, they are not one thing, they are two separate but closely related phenomena where any change in one results in a change in the other.

Any change in an electric current will result in a change in the associated magnetic field, and any change in a magnetic field will result in a change in any associated current.

However, if all of this separation and interaction is happening in a perfectly balanced manner, there is still not much reason for things to twist and turn. If the electrons being sent in one direction of a Birkeland current are given the exact same momentum as the positive ions going in the other direction, no spiraling motion should be expected.

There has to be some fundamental imbalance in the universe in order to properly explain the tendency towards spirals and spiraling motion.

In the strict particle model of physics, presented in my book, this imbalance is the difference in texture between positive and negative particle quanta.

There is a tiny tendency for positively charged particles to interact with each other. This explains the large size of the proton, relative to the electron. It also explains the existence of gravity.

Applying the same logic to the photon, we get that its positive orb will interfere somewhat destructively with its negative orb when there is interaction with positive ions. When the photon interacts with electrons, on the other hand, there is no interference.

The hook covered positive orb interacts weakly with positive ions. This reduces the effect of the negative orb's spin on positive ions. The hoop covered negative orb, on the other hand, does not in any way reduce the effect of the positive orb's spin when it comes to electrons.

The momentum given to electrons is therefore a tiny bit greater than the momentum given to positive ions.

Electrons end up with a tiny bit more energy than positive ions. To compensate for this, electrons take slightly longer paths than their positive counterparts as they move in opposite directions through space.

Tied together by their mutual attraction for each other, the electrons have to spiral around their positive counterparts in order to go the extra distance. This in turn, produces sub-currents, and we get an overall pattern of spirals from the microscopic to the galactic.

In conclusion, we can say that everything spirals due to a tiny imbalance in the magnetic force.

Origin of the Asteroid Belt

Conventional science maintains that planets are formed through a process in which gravity pulls dust and interstellar matter into a large number of asteroid size rocks that are subsequently pulled together to form planets.

The asteroid belt has been used as proof for this two step process. The idea is that Jupiter, with its gravitational pull, allowed for the formation of asteroids, but disrupted the subsequent formation of a proper planet.

This story conveniently ignores the fact that gravity does not in fact work the way that the model proposes. Gravity associated with an asteroid is much too weak to compact interstellar dust into solid rock. The first step of the process is therefore a complete impossibility.

The older theory regarding the asteroid belt makes much more sense. In this theory, an existing planet called Phaeton was blown to bits in a squabble with Jupiter. The leftover debris of this event gave us Ceres and the Asteroid belt.

Rogue planet blowing up Phaeton

The energy required to blow a planet into tiny fragments is so great that it must have been electrical in nature. A collision between two planets would not have produced the relatively small fragments that makes up the asteroid belt.

However, since conventional science does not allow for electricity to play an important role in astronomy, any alternative to the accepted theory regarding the origin of the asteroid belt has to invoke not only one collision, but a large number of them.

It is therefore no surprise that a newly presented alternative does just that. A recently published paper in the journal Nature Astronomy proposes that no less than five collisions took place.

Astronomers appear to be waking up to the impossibility of their current model. They are opening up to the fact that the asteroid belt is the debris of a violent event. But in their eagerness to hold on to their gravity only view of the universe they move from the sublime to the ridiculous. Why on Earth would five planets suddenly decide to gang up on each other at a random place between Jupiter and Mars?

Lightning and Gamma Rays

Terrestrial lightning is frequently accompanied by gamma rays, first as a flash, and then as an afterglow that can last as long as a minute.

This can all be explained in terms of an aether of low energy photons and neutrinos being energized by the rapid motion of ions and electrons.

Electron in an aether of low energy photons and neutrinos

First, an electric current is produced by a strong voltage potential that rips electrons away from their atomic nuclei. Electrons move in one direction and positive ions move in the other direction.

Nearby low energy photons are exited in the process, resulting in the visible flash as well as the initial gamma ray flash.

If the thunderbolt is particularly energetic, we get a situation where gamma rays are ripped apart into electron-positron pairs.

Gamma ray photon ripped apart into an electron-positron pair

This leaves an abundant supply of positrons which in turn explains the gamma ray afterglow. The newly produced positrons find electrons to re-combine into gamma rays.

Electron and positron combine into a gamma ray photon

The production of gamma rays inside terrestrial thunderstorms is exactly what we would expect in a physics in which there is an abundant supply of low energy photons in the aether.