| |
CHAPTER
TWO – LIGHT ON QUANTUM PHYSICS
2.1 BASICS OF AETHERIC
QUANTUM MECHANICS
Dr. Kozyrev’s experiments
give us a radically different view of
matter, and its interaction and connection
with the surrounding environment, than
that which is taught in the scientific
mainstream. Therefore, a new model of
quantum mechanics is required to account
for matter being able to subtly increase
and decrease in its weight, based on its
interaction with a non-electromagnetic,
fluidlike energy source. The more esoteric
questions related to how torsion fields
connect with consciousness and spirituality
shall be relegated to later chapters;
at this point, our main concern is to
establish a working system of physics
that explains exactly what matter is.
If nothing else, Kozyrev’s findings
show us that we still do not have an adequate
model to answer that question.
Thankfully, many adept thinkers
are tackling the problems with quantum
physics and have come up with aether-based
models that answer these nagging questions,
which have been almost completely ignored
in the Western mainstream scientific community.
These pioneers would include Dr. Milo
Wolff, Dr. Vladimir Ginzburg, Dr. Volodymyr
Krasnoholovets, Charles Cagle, “Smart
1234,” Dr. John Nordberg, Lt. Col.
Tom Bearden, Dr. Henry Myers, Dr. Harold
Aspden, Dr. R.B. Duncan, Buckminster Fuller,
Dr. Oliver Crane and many more. Each of
these sources contain different pieces
of “the puzzle”, however we
feel that the work of Rod Johnson is needed
for all remaining paradoxes to be completely
accounted for – and it shall be
introduced in Chapter Four. Although it
is certainly possible for future authors
to present a complete, unified model,
we will just cover enough interesting
highlights here to show that such a model
can and does indeed exist.
2.2 GINZBURG’S
NEW VIEW OF RELATIVITY
Our first key concepts to
explore come from Dr. Vladimir Ginzburg,
who was born in Moscow, USSR and moved
to the U.S. with his family in 1974. Having
received his Ph.D. in technical sciences
in 1968, he was certainly well positioned
to have heard about the findings of Kozyrev,
one of Russia’s top astrophysicists.
However, as we said, there was a strong
desire for secrecy in the Soviet regime
on these matters, and Ginzburg never mentions
Kozyrev’s name in his work. Nevertheless,
Ginzburg discovered that a few simple
changes could be made to the common equations
for relativity theory that would not disagree
with any known observations and that furthermore
perfectly explain the weight-changing
anomalies of matter that Kozyrev had noted.
Relativity theory states
that an object gradually increases in
its mass once we begin accelerating it.
In conventional scientific thought, no
object can exceed the speed of light,
because as it approaches this speed, the
equations state that the object would
become infinitely massive. Yet, in very
loose terms, Ginzburg found that you could
completely reverse (invert) these equations
without violating any known scientific
observations. This means that instead
of growing more massive, an object will
actually shed energy back into the aether
as it is moved, thus causing it to gradually
lose all of its core characteristics of
gravitational mass, inertial mass and
electric charge as it approaches the speed
of light. Ginzburg introduces these new
concepts in the next quote: [We have added
emphasis and deleted the letters for terms
such as “velocity” in order
to enhance readability:]
The main two features of
these new equations are:
- Both the gravitational
mass and inertial mass of a particle
decrease as its velocity [speed] increases.
- [The] electric charge
of a particle [also] decreases as its
velocity increases…
As seen here, an object’s
overall mass (weight) is represented by
both gravitational and inertial masses,
which are simply measurements of how gravity
and inertia behave on the object. Curiously,
both gravity and inertia have essentially
identical effects on matter, which is
known as Einstein’s “Principle
of Equivalence”. This principle
shows us that gravity and inertia are
two forms of the same energy at equal
strength – one moving downward (gravity)
and one providing resistance as we move
through space (inertia.) This is one of
the easiest ways to see that there must
indeed be an “aether” or “physical
vacuum” that is behind both forces,
and Kozyrev had also noted this connection
in his own studies. So, once we start
accelerating an object, (which we said
is like a sponge submerged in water in
this new model,) the added pressure will
compress the atoms and molecules in the
object and cause more and more of its
aether to be released.
Ginzburg then continues:
You may not be prepared
to abandon immediately the century-old
relativistic equations. But once you
are ready to do so, you will discover
many amazing things:
- Only when a particle
is as rest may it be considered as
“pure” matter. As soon
as the particle begins to move, its
gravitational mass and electrical
charge will start to decrease in accordance
with the new relativistic equations,
so that a part of its matter will
be converted into a field. When the
particle’s velocity becomes
equal to the ultimate spiral field
velocity “C”, its gravitational
mass and electric charge become equal
to zero. At this point, matter will
be completely converted into a “pure”
field.
The “ultimate spiral
field velocity” of “C”
that Ginzburg mentions is slightly higher
than the normal speed of light, due to
the spiraling path that he believes all
energy must follow. This simple change
to the basic relativity equations then
leads to a new quantum physics of transmutation,
with the concept that an object could
completely disappear from our known physical
reality. This raises a key question: “Disappear
to where?”
2.3 MISHIN AND ASPDEN
BOTH FIND DIFFERENT LEVELS OF AETHER DENSITY
Ginzburg asserts that an
object becomes “pure field”
as it increases up to light speed. However,
there is solid evidence that there are
different vibratory levels of aether,
and we therefore conclude that as an object
is accelerated towards the speed of light,
either by linear motion, internal vibration
or related energetic action, the missing
energy and mass is simply displaced into
a higher vibratory level of aether. In
this book we shall refer to these levels
as densities. As one example, if you put
pressure on a beach ball by slowly pushing
it into water, you can gradually move
it from being surrounded by air to being
surrounded by water, which is denser.
When you release the pressure that you
placed on the beach ball, the higher density
of the water will cause it to pop back
into the lower-density atmosphere once
more. You will see that nothing in the
basic form of the beach ball has changed.
Though this is a rather crude analogy,
it is by far the best one to explain many
anomalies that we will discuss throughout
this book.
Certain scientists such
as Dr. A.M. Mishin, Dr. Harold Aspden,
Dr. Nikola Tesla and John Keely have all
independently discovered that the aether
is sub-divided into different levels of
density. From these findings, we know
that the qualities of matter and energy
will be different in each density, leading
to changes in the basic “laws”
of physics within each level. We shall
touch briefly upon their discoveries to
put our discussion in the proper context.
First of all, Dr. A.M. Mishin
of St. Petersburg, Russia conducted extensive
measurements over long periods of time
in his laboratory, which showed that the
aether simultaneously exists in different
states, and the state that you will detect
is dependent on what type of turbulent
disturbance that you create. These findings
were established through measurements
taken by auto-oscillating electromechanical
systems similar to some of Kozyrev’s
designs, with an undisclosed “added
component” that was more suited
to detecting torsion waves from biological
systems as opposed to inorganic systems.
With these measurement devices and techniques,
Mishin could detect:
- the “temperature”
of the aether, akin to the amount of
vibratory disturbance in it,
- the direction and polarization
of the aether, and
- the flowing movements
or “fluxes” of the aether.
Mishin numbered the different
densities of aether that he discovered
as follows:
- Ether-1 behaved like
a solid-state body;
- Ether-2 behaved like
a dense superfluid liquid;
- Ether-3 behaved like
a gaseous body, connected with molecular
motion;
- Ether-4 is the state
we observe as stellar plasma energy;
- Ether-5 corresponds to
galactic processes.
As we can see, it appears
that each level of aether that Mishin
discovered has a different level of density
than the others, most specifically visible
in the first three, which are obviously
in decreasing order of density. We should
remember that Dr. Mishin is not the only
scientist to have discovered that the
aether exists at different density levels.
Since the 1950s, Dr. Harold Aspden has
documented similar discoveries, and in
his case they are backed up by extensive
equations. Furthermore, all the major
foundations of Aspden’s work had
successfully passed peer-review processes
and ended up being published in prestigious
scientific journals, and this material
shall be covered in later chapters. Also,
the 19th century physicist John Keely
classified seven different densities of
aether, probably through a discovery process
similar to Dr. Mishin’s.
All of this research allows
us to introduce the concept that these
different levels of aetheric energy density
actually correspond to different “dimensions”
or planes of existence. Many ancient mystery-school
teachings seem to agree that there is
an Octave of seven major densities that
correspond with the colors in the rainbow
or the notes in the Diatonic musical scale,
and this has been well covered in our
previous volumes. Such a wonderful, elegant
solution to the quirky mathematical problems
of “higher dimensions” is
exactly what we would expect to see in
a Divine Cosmos. The purest, most harmonic
vibrations of visible light and audible
sound are both conveniently organized
into an Octave framework, and it appears
that the vibrations of the aether are
no different.
As we continue to present
information throughout the rest of this
book, the combined effect of Mishin and
Aspden’s models of a multi-leveled
“aether” will be very important
to our arguments. Mishin gives us the
direct observational evidence that such
levels exist, and Aspden gives us a complete
mathematical foundation to explain how
and why they exist. Never before has there
been a theory of quantum physics that
can account for mysterious, documented
effects related to objects appearing,
disappearing and / or reappearing around
us. These effects include the anomalies
of the Bermuda Triangle and other such
vortexes as well as the many surprising,
scientifically documented accounts of
telekinesis, such as those now emerging
from China in Paul Dong’s book China’s
Super Psychics, discussed later in this
book. The material in this book sets forth
such a theory that satisfies these requirements.
Even more importantly, we will establish
that these differing aetheric densities
must also correspond to different levels
of intelligence and consciousness. And
for now, we must continue to focus on
the basics.
2.4 GINZBURG AND
THE “DYNOSPHERE”
Dr. Ginzburg also suggests
that his new relativity equations reveal
the existence of spiraling waves of energy,
and a “spiral field” that
travels through a sphere-based, fluidlike
aether that he calls the “dynosphere:”
[The] dynosphere is an
assembly of the field bubbles that fill
the entire space in the universe.
Obviously, Ginzburg’s
theory is in exact harmony with Kozyrev’s
findings. Ultimately, the “aether”
must be visualized at the tiniest level
as being composed of spherical bubbles
of aetheric energy that exist throughout
the entire Universe. Torsion waves move
through this aether by causing adjacent
“field bubbles” to bump into
each other. No one bubble actually moves
very far in its position, just as a set
of floating objects can essentially remain
in the same position as waves roll by
in the water. Each time an impulse of
momentum hits a field bubble, the bubble
then collides into its neighbors, transferring
the momentum. The impulse will continue
to be transferred along even though all
the bubbles end up in the same relative
positions that they started in.
Ginzburg’s new model
also leads to the idea that atoms and
molecules are simply vortex formations,
akin to smoke rings or whirlpools, which
have formed within this fluid-like aether
that he calls the dynosphere. Though he
and many other thinkers have provided
great amounts of evidence to back up their
claims, most mainstream scientists continue
to shun these concepts. They stand on
the well-worn edifices of thought that
insist that atoms are made of particles.
However, we will now demonstrate that
the particle model is nothing more than
a belief that has been built up from a
series of assumptions.
2.5 ASSUMPTIONS
OF QUANTUM PHYSICS
Niels Bohr was the first
to promote the “magnetron”
model of the atom, which involves particles
that orbit each other like a tiny Solar
System. Many people are not aware that
this model cannot be true and is actually
quite misleading, as a number of experiments
confirm that the so-called “particles”
behave as if they were waves. This leads
to confusing problems such as the Schroedinger’s
Cat paradox and Heisenberg’s Uncertainty
Principle, both of which try to tell us
that atoms are not actually “real”
but are only “probabilities”
at the quantum level. To have something
that is not “real” as the
foundation of matter seems quite absurd.
Here, we must remember that the majority
of our conclusions about the quantum realm
are assumptions only, which have been
built up from only two indirect sources:
- Spectroscope Analysis
- Vapor-Trail
Analysis
Beginning with the first
on the list, spectroscope analysis is
simpler than most would imagine. A particular
element (group of atoms) is stored in
a small, transparent container while it
is in a changing state of energy, which
causes it to release light (photons).
Then, a special form of light is shone
through the element, which pushes the
released photons along so that they pass
through a prism (lens) or grating (slot)
that breaks them up into a rainbow color
spectrum. The spectrum is then recorded
on film and analyzed, and due to the unique
quality of the light radiation that is
shined through the changing element, (which
is appropriately named as “black
body” radiation,) the film will
only capture a small series of vertical
colored lines. These lines are created
by untold numbers of photons, at certain
exact color frequencies, which the chemical
element is releasing. So all we know for
certain is that the atoms are releasing
certain color frequencies of light (photons),
which are then being analyzed –
anything else is an informed assumption.
The second category of quantum
measurement is “vapor-trail”
or “bubble chamber” analysis.
The medium that is used to detect the
“particles” is typically a
glass chamber that is filled with highly
pressurized gas, such as water vapor.
The pressure is so high that no further
molecules can be forced in, and when a
charged “particle” travels
through the medium, it creates visible
disturbances. Here is Dr. Milo Wolff’s
explanation of this:
The second means of measurement
involves directing single charged particles
to enter a medium which will record
the particle’s path by abstracting
part of its energy to create some sort
of visible reaction in the medium. Photographic
film and vapor-saturated air or liquids
are common media. In the latter two
cases the passage of the particle [through
the medium] causes tiny fog particles
or bubbles to appear; hence the method
is called a cloud chamber or a bubble
chamber. If a magnetic field is present,
the particle path is curved [in a spiral]
and measurement of the path permits
calculation of mass, momentum and energy.
As Dr. Wolff indicates,
the vast majority of our “particle”
beliefs come from these two forms of measurement
and the assumptions that have been inferred
from them. One additional case of “proof”
concerns the idea that atoms have a nucleus
of particles. This came about from Rutherford’s
experiment where he bombarded a piece
of very thin gold foil with high-energy
protons, and measured how many of the
protons passed through the foil. A very
small but measurable number of the protons
did not pass through the foil. Since not
all of the protons went through, Rutherford
concluded that these protons had bounced
off of a tiny “nucleus” in
the center of the atom and that the rest
of the area was largely “empty space.”
So, we have Rutherford’s
experiment, spectroscopy and bubble chamber
analysis as the foundation upon which
the vast majority of assumptions about
quantum physics have been made. No atoms
had even remotely been “seen”
visually until 1985, when IBM Research
Almaden Labs was the first to use an electron
tunneling microscope to actually photograph
the organization of molecules of germanium
in an ink-blot. What we see from this
experiment in Figure 2.1 are indistinct,
fuzzy spherical objects that appear to
have some non-spherical geometric qualities
to their shape and are in an extremely
geometric pattern of organization, which
was definitely a surprise for conventional
science. The image was artificially colored
orange and green to allow the eye to discriminate
between the two types of atom that were
seen:
Figure 2.1 – Actual
photograph of atoms of germanium in an
ink-blot.
Furthermore, when quantum
physicists have studied the “electrons”
of the atom, they have observed that they
are not actually “points”
at all, but rather form smooth, teardrop-shaped
“clouds” where the narrowest
ends of the “drops” converge
upon a very tiny point in the center (Figure
2.2). Here, we shall reprint excerpts
from Dr. Milo Wolff’s book just
to make the point absolutely clear, with
emphasis added:
p. 122 – There are
no Electron Orbits! Whoever started
the notion of electrons traveling around
the nucleus like planets made a terrible
blunder! If you have learned such an
idea, discard it immediately. Instead,
all calculations and all experiments
show that no satellite-like orbital
motion exists in the normal atom. Instead,
there are standing wave patterns. For
example, see the case of N=1 in Figure
9-1 [or in these diagrams, M=0 and L=0]
where the standing wave pattern is entirely
spherical. The center of the electron
pattern is also the center of the proton
pattern. This is the normal situation
of the H atoms in the universe; they
have spherical symmetry, not orbits.
Figure
2.2 – Electron clouds from top-down
view (L) and from side view (R).
[Courtesy Wolff, 1990]
p. 133 –
- All experiments
to probe a central structure of the
electron have been negative.
- No QM theory exists
that predicts a size for the electron,
a mass, nor a charge. Further, there
is no theory that quantifies the particle
in a meaningful calculation. This implies
that QM actually has no need of a particle
concept because all the calculations
are the same whether or not you believe
in particles.
- The substantiality
of “mass” is doubtful because
it can always be converted to electromagnetic
energy, which has no particle properties.
As Dr. Wolff suggests, the
observed teardrop shapes of electron clouds
are exactly what we would expect when
seeing a “standing wave” of
vibration. We remember that the hydrogen
atom’s electron cloud was seen to
have a spherical shape. This is also a
direct indication that atoms are vortex
formations, since the hydrogen atom is
considered the “building block”
of all the other elements, with one hypothetical
“proton” in the nucleus and
one hypothetical “electron”
that is actually represented by the spherical
cloud.
2.6 NEGATIVE AND
POSITIVE: SIMPLE DIFFERENCES IN PRESSURE
As every scientist knows,
the electron clouds have a negative charge
and the “protons” in the much-tinier
nucleus area have a positive charge. This
is known as “charge polarity,”
since there are two charges that are polarized,
or opposite. It has long been a mystery
as to what this truly means, and why there
is a “flow” of charge. This
problem has boggled the mind of many a
scientist, and Dr. Aspden admits it in
the following quote:
I admit that I cannot
as yet solve the riddle of charge polarity.
It lies in unexplored territory and
apart from a few brief excursions into
that territory, I see it as uncharted
ground… [it is] a challenge and
possibly the final frontier of our conquest
of physics. It surprises me that the
subject is not even mentioned by physicists
as something warranting research investigation.
It seems that it is easier to explore
what happened in the first moments of
the ‘Big Bang’ than to look
into what is happening within us and
all around us here and now on Earth.
[emphasis added]
In Dr. O. Crane’s
new model and certain others, these opposing
charges, or charge polarities of negative
and positive are actually nothing more
than differences in aetheric pressure.
The negative electron clouds have a higher
pressure, and the positive nucleus has
a lower pressure. Put simply, the negative
charges in the electron clouds are flowing
into the positively charged area at the
center of the atom.
This suggests that a much
easier unification between electromagnetism
and gravity is possible, as both gravity
and charge polarity represent the pressing-in
of aetheric energy towards the center
of the spherical field or object. (Esoteric
science might say that these are both
forms of “the striving of all matter
and energy to again become One.”)
The only real difference, then, between
gravity and charge polarity is in the
strength of aetheric pressure that is
measured, and the degree of symmetry with
which the energy flow presses in across
the sphere’s surface. Why do we
say symmetry is important? Simply put,
the gravitational forces on Earth are
very consistent from one place to another,
whereas in the atom you have areas between
the electron clouds where there is no
“flow” of energy towards the
center. We will explain why there are
these partitioned areas later in this
chapter.
Now, with Dr. Crane’s
“aetheric pressure” concept
for charge, the mystery of charge polarity
is cleared. This concept is given undeniable
factual support by what is known as the
Biefield-Brown effect, first proposed
by Prof. Paul Biefield, who had once been
a fellow student of Albert Einstein in
Zurich, Switzerland. Biefield proposed
an “aetheric” concept of charge
as a flow of aether, where the negative
charge was an area of high pressure within
a sea of aetheric energy, and this pressure
would flow into low-pressure areas of
what we call positive charge in this same
sea. If this model were indeed true, Biefield
proposed, then with a high enough level
of electromagnetic intensity, it should
be possible for an anti-gravitational
propulsive force to be created.
The first person to successfully
test Biefield’s theoretical effect
was Dr. Townsend T. Brown in 1923. His
experiment involved a “plate condenser,”
which is simply a positive electric plate
(literally a disc shape, interestingly
enough) and a negative plate that are
sandwiched on top of each other with a
non-conductive or dielectric material
between them. Then, this plate condenser
is charged with a high amount of electricity
and suspended by a firm wire that would
be able to rotate in a large circle on
the horizontal plane if it were moved.
When this object is charged up, it will
move independently towards the positive
plate of the condenser, sustaining a constant
thrust and causing the whole wire / plate
condenser assembly to spin around in circles
by itself. Then, Dr. Crane continues:
When the condenser was
vertically fastened to a beam scale,
a weight increase showed if the positive
pole (low pressure) was pointing down.
Correspondingly a weight loss occurred
when the negative pole (high pressure)
was pointing down. The intensity of
the effect was determined by the size
of the pole plate areas, the voltage
level and the polarization capability
of the dielectric. [emphasis added]
The last statement regarding
the “polarization capability of
the dielectric” may be confusing.
As we said, a dielectric is a non-conducting
substance, which in this experiment is
sandwiched between the two oppositely
charged plates. The “polarization
capability” refers to how well the
dielectric material can keep the charges
between the two plates separated, or polarized.
So, what we can see here
is a very core and essential finding for
understanding the structure and function
of the Universe. When a flow is established
between the negative and positive pole,
a river of energy is created in the surrounding
aether, and the river of aetheric energy
will forcefully move towards the positive.
This effect is indeed strong enough to
counteract gravity. Many reputable sources
agree that Brown devised a means to create
a self-contained unit which could defeat
gravity and rise into the air on its own,
and that his work was immediately classified
thereafter. Since that time, at the Disclosure
Project Executive Summary Briefing on
May 10, 2001, which Wilcock attended along
with a number of congressional aides and
other invited guests, certain witnesses
testified that various deep-black programs
have indeed mastered the use of this technology
for propulsion. The system of concentric
magnetic rings and rotating magnetic rollers,
devised by Prof. John R. R. Searl and
discussed in our previous volume, is another
workable anti-gravity system, and was
successfully duplicated and the results
subsequently published in Russia by Roschin
and Godin.
Certain “feelers”
are starting to be put out to the public’s
attention that the Biefield-Brown effect
could be used for propulsion. Jeff Cameron
of Transdimensional Technologies filmed
two versions of his “T3” device
in action, a triangular metallic frame
with thin wires that were attached to
each corner. Over a non-conducting circular
base, the triangular frame is seen to
levitate and slightly wobble around in
the air once the electric current is turned
on. A loud and satisfying “SNAP”
is heard as the flow is cut off and the
device abruptly drops back down to the
surface. Not surprisingly, as of Feb.
2002 the entire contents of the website
were pulled except for the title page,
with a vague promise to “keep checking.”
Thankfully, in March 2002, Jim Ventura
independently replicated the exact same
experiment, which is based on the research
of Jean-Louis Naudin, and three films
of it now exist on Art Bell’s website
for the general public to view. Interestingly,
the object spins around constantly on
its wires in the first two films, suggesting
the spiraling pressure of torsion waves
(gravi-spin energy) at work.
In the atom, the high-pressure
negative “source” pushes towards
the lower-pressure positive “sink,”
and this is responsible for the electron
clouds flowing in to the nucleus. This
leads us to the conclusion that atoms
and the “empty space” of aether
that surrounds them are both made of the
same fluidlike energetic material; the
only difference is that in an atom, the
aether has begun swirling into a low-pressure
central vortex, traveling through the
electron clouds. Not surprisingly, one
informant from the Disclosure Project
revealed that the manmade ARV craft (Alien
Reproduction Vehicles) are known to the
insiders as “flux-liners.”
This is an obvious play on the term “airliner,”
and demonstrates their knowledge that
the vehicles are riding on the aetheric
energy flux or flow instead of air.
2.7 SPHERICAL SYMMETRY
AND A CENTRAL AXIS
For our next key point regarding
the nature of the atom, we see that the
“particle” experiments of
quantum physics have shown that there
is a tendency towards a spherical structure
of these energy fields. However, these
spherical structures also have been seen
to spin. Various techniques have been
used to make this discovery, such as by
measuring the qualities of identical “particles”
as they are released from an emitter at
successively different angles before colliding
with a detector. The validity of the discovery
of “spin” is not in dispute
in the mainstream quantum world. As Dr.
Wolff states it in Chapter 10 of his book,
entitled Particles and Electricity,
p. 147 – A dilemma
exists with respect to the rotational
character of spin, as follows: Particles
are spherically symmetrical in regard
to charge, mass, and behavior. In spite
of this, having a spin from a human
realm view demands a spin axis, which
would destroy the spherical symmetry!
How can this be? Is there symmetry or
isn’t there? There might be an
escape from this dilemma because whenever
spin is transferred in an interaction
(i.e. spin is measured,) the spin axis
is always found to be along the line
of particle motion. [emphasis added]
Thus, as “particles”
move through the aether, their central
axis of spin is aligned with the direction
of their motion. This gives them the exact
same “vortex” quality of movement
as we would see with a smoke ring –
this formation is automatically created
by any straight-line movement through
a fluid medium.
Our next question is exactly
what this spherical vortex will look like.
Let us begin by visualizing what happens
when we have a single fluid that rotates
around a central area. Once the fluid
begins rotating, it forms a whirlpool
along its rotational axis. This can be
demonstrated very simply by filling up
a sink with water and then stirring up
the water with our hand in a large circle.
We will quickly form a whirlpool in the
center of the circle.
Now, we need to imagine
that same fluid rotating inside of a spherical
area, in this case the outside of the
atom. What we will discover is that a
whirlpool will again form along the rotational
axis, between the north and south poles
of the sphere. This whirlpool forms a
complete hole through the center of the
sphere. On one pole of the sphere, the
water will flow in, with the vortex becoming
progressively narrower as it approaches
the center, and then the continuing momentum
of the water will cause it to flow out
through the opposite pole, the vortex
becoming progressively wider as it reaches
the outer edge. The water must flow in
one side and out the other, since it has
nowhere else to go. This is a basic property
of “torus” formations and
can be seen in the inwardly-curling movement
of smoke rings, for example.
Naturally, a picture is
worth a thousand words, and Figure 5.3
from Charles Cagle shows the structure
of the spherical torus at the quantum
level, which he calls the “electromagnetotoroid”:
Figure 2.3 – The
“Electromagnetotoroid,” showing
the spherical-torus formation
at the quantum level.
As we continue with our
investigation into the phenomenon of spin,
we find that others have adopted the spherical
torus for the quantum realm as well. Dr.
Harold Aspden’s theories in this
regard are among the most comprehensive
and well-substantiated mathematically,
and have been published in some of the
finest physics journals. Dr. Aspden also
illustrates the concept that atoms are
actually spherical torus formations, while
not using the word “torus”:
I interject here the comment
that my onward research into this subject
tracks evidence of the aether being able
to exhibit rotational momentum, angular
momentum, inasmuch as a sphere of something
having a mass density can spin about a
central axis and not disturb enveloping
aether. Such is the vista that opens provided
we keep faith with the aether belief and
do not allow our minds to be usurped by
Einstein doctrines. [emphasis added]
2.8 SPECIFIC ANOMALIES
MUST BE SATISFIED
Our job would be relatively
simple if all we had to do was to consider
spherical atoms with a central axis, forming
as vortexes in a fluidlike aether. However,
there are specific geometric anomalies
that turn up in quantum observations which
must be satisfied in order for this model
to be complete. Here are two basic quantum
problems that would need to be addressed
for the model that we are presenting to
be accurate:
First of all, we would need
to describe why “electron clouds”
form in the atom with empty spaces between
them, as opposed to simply spherical formations.
Secondly, we would need to understand
how and why these spherical-torus energy
formations gather into crystal structures,
such as sodium chloride or salt, which
forms a cube. One of the interesting properties
of such a crystal is that it will naturally
fracture into miniature versions of itself,
where the same angular relationship is
preserved between its facets.
Both questions may be solved
when we begin to understand the importance
of what are known as the Platonic solids,
a set of five different geometric shapes
that have a great deal of importance in
ancient sacred science, and have been
introduced in each of our previous volumes.
In short, the “Platonic Solid”
geometric forms will naturally appear
in a spherical “vortex” of
vibrating (pulsating) fluid. In the next
chapter we will gain an understanding
of the ancient and modern importance of
Platonic Solids, and also see the weight
of surprising and unexpected physical
evidence to prove that this theory must
be correct. Then, in Chapter Four we will
bring in the theoretical data of Rod Johnson
that completely rounds out our view of
the quantum realm.
REFERENCES:
- Aspden, Harold.
Energy
Science Tutorial #5. 1997.
- Cagle, Charles.
Electromagnetotoroid
model. 1999.
- Cameron, Jeff.
Transdimensional
Technologies. 2001.
- Crane, Oliver
et al. Central Oscillator and Space-Time
Quanta Medium. Universal Expert Publishers,
June 2000, English Edition. ISBN 3-9521259-2-X
- Mishin, A.M. (Levels
of aetheric density)
- Mishin, A.M. The
Ether Model as Result of the New Empirical
Conception. International Academy of
MegaSciences, St. Petersburg, Russia
- Wolff, Milo. Exploring
the Physics of the Unknown Universe.
Technotran Press, Manhattan Beach, CA,
1990. ISBN 0-9627787-0-2.
|