Loading...
Menu
Ebooks   ➡  Nonfiction  ➡  Science and Nature  ➡  Physics

Ethereal Mea Culpa

ETHEREAL MEA CULPA

 

 

By

Edward E. Rochon

 

 

 

Shakespir EDITION

 

 

  • * * * *

 

 

PUBLISHED BY:

Edward E. Rochon on Shakespir

 

 

Ethereal Mea Culpa

Copyright © 2017 by Edward E. Rochon

 

 

 

Thank you for downloading this eBook. This book may not be reproduced, copied and distributed for non-commercial purposes, unless prior permission is given by the author.

 

Your support and respect for the property of this author is appreciated.

 

 

 

 

 

Some Other Works by the Author

 

[Axioms & Theorems: An Essay
Brain Damage: An Essay
Clitwits & G-Spots: An Essay
Cubics: A Numbers Essay
EMF Banding Model
Global Warming: An Essay
Holographic TV: An Essay
The JU Engine
Pest Control: An Essay
Pollution Solution: An Essay
Pollution Soup Cook: An Essay
Seven Month Pregnancy: An Essay
Super Intelligence: An Essay]

 

 

Reading Material

 

 

  • * * * *

 

 

 

 

Table of Contents

Title Page

Preface

Chapter 1: Ether

Chapter 2: Microcosm

Chapter 3: Waves

Chapter 4: Immediate Reuptake

About the Author

 

 

 

Preface

This essay is a refutation of any works previously published that in any way suggest that light can be explained by anything other than wave motion. It cannot be explained by particles of any sort. An ether is absolutely essential to make theories and assertions of gravitational force and transmission of EMF work in any coherent sense. The two bugaboos were the Michelson-Morley Experiment and Black Body Anomalies. The Fitzgerald postulate explains Michelson-Morley in that matter is compressed in the direction of motion due to pressure against the ether. If the equations of Maxwell do not quite work to explain this, change the equations so that they do by any logically consistent conjecture. As for black body inconsistencies in the strength of radiation emission, the atomic world must be twisted and turned until a logically consistent explanation is achieved. If new information arises with inconsistencies, change the model again. Relativity and photons are nonsense, untenable irrational drivel. We throw out any assertion that time is not absolute, space is not a continuum, distinct from the substance of matter and independent of time.

Herr Einstein liked to pick up girls through fame. The Alice in Wonderland crowd love things curious. What is more curious than preposterous lies? Mr. Newton was a conceited popinjay, burying himself in work to avoid lustful thoughts, less interested in truth than in bragging about his virginity and famous equations. Well, the business of life is business. Apart from conmen, lying politicians and the like, the substance of that business is truth. No truth, no wisdom. No wisdom, no cures, no order and prosperity, and ultimately no life. Enough of your lies and of our folly! Back to Table of Content

 

 

Chapter 1: Ether

Sir Isaac had a problem. He fancied studying light passing through space and the motion of the planets through the same. He decided light was composed of corpuscles (photons.) These corpuscles would have great trouble traveling great distances in anything other than a vacuum. Look how quickly light fades out in water. A few hundred meters and it is gone to the naked eye. But how do the planets and sun influence each other without a medium? Why, there is some invisible attractive force that can draw through a vacuum. There is nothing in nature to support this conjecture, but Newton needs a vacuum for his photons. He also needs to explain the apparent ease at which the heavens turn. He borrows Descartes’ law (sic) of inertia and this fits in nicely with a vacuum in space. Now this law of inertia exists no place on earth. Things slow down or are pushed to accelerate. All modern experimentation on heat and radiation notes that all bodies are constantly releasing heat and radiation. The energy cannot be constant without a compensating input of equal proportion. This compensating input is nowhere to be found. Hot bodies in an inertial framework of relative coolness is all pervasive. The Newtonian Law of Inertia is a construct to explain so called laws of motion that are not laws at all.

As I have previously stated, the two physical surmises for physical motion current in Ancient Greece were completely demolished by Parmenides and Zeno. A consistent theory must reconcile these elements: space, matter, motion: and these through time. The Democritus theory of atoms is logically inconsistent with force through matter to create motion. These particles cannot exist as surmised by Democritus. They require instantaneous speed, an impossibility for obvious reasons. The continuum of matter supposition of Aristotle also falls by the way for the same reason, requiring instantaneous motion (infinite speed.)

Now, we live in a practical world of practical needs and need practical theories to predict the things needed for our practical lives. Good enough, we need mathematical and logical algorithms to analyze space, matter and time. Democritus and Aristotle are out of the picture. Since Newton is essentially a proponent of Democritus, his laws are not laws at all, but merely algorithms that work within parameters. Relativity is utter nonsense from several angles. Space is space. Space does not contract or expand. There is nothing but space to contract or expand into, and that is seamless. Assuming space in space gives only space, and it is, speaking of space bending is nonsense. Bending into what? Space is space is space. Einstein received a Nobel Prize for explaining black body anomalies from the point of view of fanciful particles (not particles), that possessed nonsense attributes. It appears that energy release does not follow a continuous progression from black bodies. Max Planck supposed distinct increments of energy could fit a model to the results. What are Newton’s corpuscles but quanta of energy with nothing between. So we go back to Newton, but Maxwell’s equations seem good and suppose waves of radiation emission. We end up with the mumbo-jumbo of wave-particles. A particle follows uniform motion with respect to its movement against its boundaries, the boundaries that define it as a particle. A wave is a multiform motion. We mean by that it is the result of aggregate motion of particles in a back and forth, or in and out motion. The wave is the effect of these aggregate motions. Waves are effects. Particles are objects.

You can mix particles of gravel with a mass of wax. Both are particles or things of a sort. You cannot mix an effect with a particle, though to be sure, waves can travel through any particle. We account for this by concluding that the particle is composed of smaller particles that act in aggregate to create the effect of the wave motion through the particle. All of our experience in life indicates that big things can be broken into smaller things. So things are not effects and effects are not things.

While Fitzgerald’s assertion was cogent, people wondered about the torquing effect of such rapid shifts in morphology. Why no heat generation or otherwise signs of distortion in process? Why did not the matter simply break apart as a constantly twisted piece of metal flipped this way and that? We must suppose immediate uptake of torque stress back into angular momentum. Our modern discoveries suppose immense energy within small amounts of matter. This is not evident under normal conditions, so it is conceived as angular momentum balanced against other motions in angular trajectory. If we accept this, we simply accept immediate re-uptake of ether torquing forces and make any adjustment and/or suppositions to predict and tentatively explain this. That is the matter of Fitzgerald.

Led astray by the great prestige of Einstein’s photoelectric effect, that and the observations of black bodies, and looking for another explanation of Michelson-Morley than that of Fitzgerald, I gave up on light as purely waveform. I regret this and am going back to this as a future basis for my considerations.

At night I see dots of light falling from the sky. I see momentary dots of lights in my backyard in summer. Bubble chamber boys see specks of light in bubble chambers. Look, it is a dot and must be a particle. No, it must not. Of a certainty, it is not a dot particle that has zero mass at rest. Zero mass is no mass at all. Accelerating nothing does not add mass to that nothing. There is no such thing as a wave-particle, an absurdity. Huygens was under no such logical compulsion to see firefly flickers as proof of Newton’s corpuscles, nor your dots in bubble chambers a compulsion to the world to see such at present. Your physics is so much superstitious drivel. You do not care. After all, is it not curious? “Does it not make us wizards, wizards of lies forced down the throats of fools?” you say. But who is the greater fool here? Your so called proofs are outright lies, manipulation of data or misinterpreted data. Back to Table of Content

 

 

Chapter 2: Microcosm

There is the microcosm of the ether and the microcosm of the elements. We must suppose a microcosm on both counts to explain the decay of matter, the great speed of light through the vastness of space. Earlier scientists supposed that the ether must be rigid to allow such great speeds attendant to light. But this was always untenable, not allowing for the passage of heavenly bodies according to observations. Even assuming very small particles, a rigid structure is not tenable. So we need a dynamic ether that literally has winds other than the passage of planets through the ether creating an effective wind. It must be like the atmosphere. The atmosphere has wind and more than that, is moved along with the planet through space. True, the air is relatively static in many cases, but never absolutely so, neither with respect to relative position of adjoining particles, nor with the aggregate motion of upwellings.

We must conclude that with the following factors taken into account that the speed of light can be accounted for with a dynamic ether:

As long as the particles are:
Sufficiently small enough
Sufficiently light enough
Sufficiently hard enough
Sufficiently packed enough

We can see that sufficiently small enough ether particles could pass through heavenly bodies composed of larger compound elements fairly easily, producing little wind or friction on that account. This could not be absolutely true, so some displacement of ether would have to occur.

We can see that sufficiently light enough ether particles could bounce off of matter with relative ease and create comparatively little disparate collision heat and torquing forces. Mutually bumping energy between ether particles would also produce minimal collision energy displacement.

We can see that sufficiently hard ether particles will bump off of each other quite energetically and with comparatively little compression, preventing a dampening effect that might slow down the passage of EMF through space.

We can see that sufficiently dense packing of ether particles will give the effect of rigidity (liquid like) without actually being rigid, allowing for the fast transmission of waves through the medium.

With respect to the structure of the elements, we cannot see this structure. The electron microscope shows only bumps and smudges, and that is through the medium of electronic circuitry. We must assume that the problems of the black body radiation observations are the result of the composition of the elements, that transform in some unknown ways due to their microscopic structure when transforming under the rise and fall of temperature. The current models of the atom are just that, models. They also tend to be logically inconsistent. We should feel no qualms in twisting and turning our surmises about what that structure is in order to explain and possibly predict behavior of radiation acting upon matter. Should new data arise that is out of sync with future models, start looking for another model. That is what we have been doing over the centuries anyway.

As for Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle barring the doors to discovery, this principle does not exist other than in minds of fools. If the effects of a measuring device are active upon the object of measurement, there must be some basis of that effect in logic. Logically, that effect can be coefficient to the result, modifying the measurement by some factor x. Use a more sensitive device to calibrate the measuring device according to the amount of the distortion. Then find a more accurate device to calibrate that device. It is merely a practical matter of precision, not an absolute barrier. A ruler may expand or contract when the weather changes. This is nothing new, is empirical, not absolute in logic. The mere fact that you are aware of the distortions leaves open exclusion of those errors from results. The same is true for the absolute determination of time. Time is absolute by definition. Things are what they are. The flaws in your chronometer change nothing. Average out the time with many clocks; make a better clock, one better than that and average, and on and on. Time is absolute by identity. Quantities of anything are absolute by definition, by identity. Things are what they are or they are not what you say they are, but what they are in fact. Your fuzziness of mind is not germane to logic. These are practical matters only.

Twist and turn the supposition of material construction all you like, but leave off twisting the truth of what space and time clearly are. Leave off twisting mathematical truth to conform to faulty experimentation and/or misinterpreted data. There is no place for the nonsense of relativity or quantum mechanics in science. Back to Table of Content

 

 

Chapter 3: Waves

An abstract from my Essay: EMF Banding Model

Physics has developed a false distinction between transverse waves and longitudinal waves. Water waves appear the way they are because of a discontinuity of mediums, the air and water. A rope wave is a special case due to the construction and discontinuity between the rope substance and the air, or medium of its operation. Geology produces strata of many sorts that are discontinuities in their own right. They alter wave transmission due to permittivity of the medium. They act like ropes embedded in rock. It is impossible to separate longitudinal waves from transverse waves in any true waveform. They go together or not at all. This is a matter of logic and definition of what a wave is. No apparent data can overturn it. For more on this see my UFT essay.

You probably know of the polarization problem of light and the supposed absence of longitudinal propagation in light. I rejected this long ago because it does not conform to logic. I could not explain the experimental results, but attributed it to some unknown flaw in the experiments or some unknown factor in nature. I now tend to subscribe to the latter. What is the natural factor? It is that EMF is not a true waveform but a hybrid uniform motion that appears to be a wave due to changes in state of subatomic substance upon impact with target detectors.

Hardly needed to say, the last sentence of the abstract no longer holds much allure to me. One of my own laws of nature is that all transmission of energy, whether in uniform or multiform (waves) motion must act with an equal force operating at right angles to the direction of motion. The force at right angle in uniform motion oscillates back and forth and so cancels out.

We can reasonably conclude that EMF is a manifestation of this, that there is no difference between electric fields and magnetic fields, being the same basic force. Permanent magnets, the cause of differentiation in the past, no longer holds any problem for us. A constant electrical activity is present in the permanent magnet, yet not unbalanced so as to cause a current flow from the magnet to surrounding bodies that may come in contact with it, other than the induction effect of passing substances through its magnetic field, that must in turn cause changes in its complementary electric field within the magnet, as the magnet’s magnetic field is also influenced.

I discussed polarization from the viewpoint of banded particles in the above mentioned prior essay. Some of that may still be relevant in a true waveform EMF, because the waves interact with matter (electrons) in a similar manner. We would probably be well advised to parallel macrocosmic observations to the microcosmic world but with increased velocity of charging and discharging of forces, as suggested in my Unified Field Theory essay. In effect, electrons are but droplets of liquid and can be liquefied as postulated by Franklin and later reaffirmed by Nikola Tesla.

We need to explain how the planets move through this ether that carries light. We resort to the same premise underlying my explanation of where the twisting force goes during a Fitzgerald contraction of matter. Back to Table of Content

 

 

Chapter 4: Immediate Re-uptake

All in the microcosmic world is quick, very quick. The energy dispensed by the planets and heavenly bodies moving through the ether is immediately reabsorbed back into the bodies in the form of angular momentum, and re-discharged as EMF. Gamma rays are very fine waves. The solar wind pushes through the ether fairly easily as the ether particles move out of the way fairly easily or pass through the solar wind particles. Undoubtedly, there is also some energy re-uptake back into the solar particles as well.

My basic idea of gravitational force is that planets push themselves through space through unbalanced angular momentum in the bodies, while emanating radiation into the ether that interacts with other bodies by interference. Negative interference unbalances the radiation fields of heavenly bodies such that the fields are weaker on the near side, thus pushing the bodies toward each other.

I regret the time spent on speculating upon Newton’s corpuscles, and regret any time spent by those reading my essays on that subject. Perhaps something useful might come of it for my own endeavors and perhaps for the endeavors of others. Back to Table of Content

#####

 

Other Works by the Author

[(*]Available online[)*]

Elements of Physics: Matter
Elements of Physics: Space
Elements of Physics: Time
Space as Infinity: An Essay
Space as Infinity II: An Essay
Unified Field Theory: An Essay
Collected Poems I
Collected Poems II
Golden Age Essays
Golden Age Essays II
Golden Age Essays III
Golden Age Essays IV
Golden Age Essays V

 

About the Author

My current biography and contact links are posted at Shakespir.com/profile/view/EdRochon. My writings include essays, poetry and dramatic work. Though I write poetry, my main interest is essays about the panoply of human experience and knowledge. This includes philosophy, science and the liberal arts. Comments, reviews and critiques of my work are welcome. Thank you for reading my book.

Back to Title Page


Ethereal Mea Culpa

Preface explains purpose of the essay. Briefly lay out support of wave theory of light. Take some swipes at Einstein and Newton. Chapter 1 briefly goes over the history of the problem from Ancient Greece to modern times. We attack Democritus, Aristotle and Newton. We take issue with Einstein's photoelectric theory of quanta and propose going back to Fitzgerald supposition for explanation of Michelson-Morley. Chapter 2 discusses the microcosm of the ether and elements. We note that sufficiently small, light, hard and densely packed ether particles will allow light to pass rapidly and planets to pass along their orbits without recourse to a rigid ether. We suggest twisting concepts of subatomic world to find answers to black body anomalies. Chapter 3 goes over my ideas on gravitation, the liquid nature of electrons and liquid nature of current. Chapter 4 states that both the torque created by the Fitzgerald effect and the motion of the planets through the ether can be immediately returned to angular momentum within the impacted, twisted items, allowing the same energy to remain within the arms of an interferometer on the one hand, and to cycle through to push planets through the ether. This is all done briefly without detailed mathematical explanations. I express regret at spending time on photon suppositions of any kind and apologize for past essays that attempted to posit the photon.

  • Author: Edward E. Rochon
  • Published: 2017-02-18 19:50:09
  • Words: 3111
Ethereal Mea Culpa Ethereal Mea Culpa