The Dimensions of Charge

[volantis]

In Classical physics, charge is usually expressed as a single dimension. For example, current is equal to coul/sec. However, there are other units in Classical physics where the charge dimension is expressed as distributed charge. These units are capacitance, inductance, permeability, permittivity, and conductance.

We can see from analyzing the unit of magnetic moment that not only should charge be distributed, but there are two different types of charge.

What does distributed charge mean? Let's look at the length dimensions for a moment. When we have one dimension of length, we get a line. So one dimension of length is linear in nature. Similarly, if we take one dimension of time, then time is linear in the sense that it moves from the past toward the future without changing direction. Also, by doing quantum analysis, we can determine that mass is linear in nature, as well.

When we have two orthogonal dimensions of length, that is, two lengths at 90 degrees to each other, then we have area. Area is distributed length. Similarly, if there are two dimensions of orthogonal time, we end up with distributed time. Surprisingly, distributed time is widely used in the computation of planetary orbits as distributed time is "orbital period." Mass does not have a distributed characteristic. But charge does.

Mass always remains linear in nature, and similarly, charge always remains distributed in nature. Just as distributed length produces an area, distributed charge would similarly cover an area. But distributed charge is not inherently dependent upon a particular length. So we can have a charge of one coulomb squared on the surface of a balloon, add more air to the balloon to increase the surface, but the charge will not change.

Charge has been incorrectly presented in Classical and quantum physics as a point particle. In nature, there is no such thing. In reality, charge is a dimension, just as length, time, and mass.

What are the implications of charge being distributed, rather than single dimension? The implication is that since some units are already expressed in distributed charge, while other units are not, then some combinations of units do not appear to have the correct relationship to others.

Here's an example. In Classical physics, capacitance is equal to potential times charge. But if charge should always be expressed in distributed dimensions, then capacitance would simply be the reciprocal of potential. This would explain why capacitors have inherent potential. Just the mere presence of a capacitor means there is a potential present. The potential is inversely proportional to the capacitance. So as the capacitance increases, the inherent potential decreases.

However, if we make a very small capacitance capacitor, then it will inherently have a higher potential associated with it. But before you get the idea to build a free energy device from this, you should know that a one picofarad capacitor would only have a potential of about 1.71 picovolts. In order to tap capacitance as a source of free energy, we would need to engineer a nanodevice filled with billions of tiny capacitors wired in series and capable of withstanding the total potential.

These are some of the new insights offered by the Aether Physics Model.

[Guille]

I'm convinced by your post, I now believe that charge has several dimensions. I have still two questions:

1. Why must mass always be linear, and thus have only one dimension?

2. Why must charge only have 2 dimensions, could it have more? why? why not?

[dleviwing]

Volantis;
Do you really believe scientist are so ignorant as to have made such errors in understanding the nature of charge???

[volantis]

I'm convinced by your post, I now believe that charge has several dimensions. I have still two questions:
1. Why must mass always be linear, and thus have only one dimension?

We have a tendency to want to continually reduce our understanding to finer principles, but at some point we reach a limit. As far as physical existence goes, it begins very specifically at the level of primary angular momentum. We can only examine the dimensions of primary angular momentum and the geometry of the Aether in which it resides. After that, there is no "why" or "how" without delving into metaphysics. The quantum subatomic particles are quantum because they are the most basic forms of matter that can be measured.

It is in examining the structure of primary angular momentum (Planck's constant in the case of the electron) that we see mass has a linear structure.

2. Why must charge only have 2 dimensions, could it have more? why? why not?

When we examine the structure of primary angular momentum, we see that mass is a linear, circular structure and that it moves perpendicular to its diameter through a quantum Aether unit. As the string of mass moves sideways through the Aether unit, it scans an area. This combination of a string of mass moving through the Aether is what causes strong charge. Hence, the strong charge of the electron is quantified as h * Cd, or Planck's constant times the conductance of the Aether.

It is simply by observing the quantum Aether dynamics that we can determine that mass is linear and charge is distributed.

[volantis]

Do you really believe scientist are so ignorant as to have made such errors in understanding the nature of charge???

Yes, but that is not merely an opinion, it is based upon having found a better, quantifiable understanding of charge. Should it be so surprising that science has made a fundamental error when there are so many "anomalies," paradoxes, and counterintuitive explanations in modern physics?

[AntonioLao]

I agree with the idea that the general concept of charge does allow each type of charges to exist in different space and time dimension. For the space dimensions, they are defined by distances. For the time dimensions, they are defined by angles.

[volantis]

I agree with the idea that the general concept of charge does allow each type of charges to exist in different space and time dimension. For the space dimensions, they are defined by distances. For the time dimensions, they are defined by angles.

Exactly. That is what the physics shows. The closer we look at charge structure through the APM, the more we see how charge relies on velocity and manifests as both a surface characteristic and angle characteristic. You're picking it up quick.

[Guille]

Volantis,

Thanks for your response.

One mayor question has now arrived to me:

According to your QAD, can the dimensions you have been defining and explaining (mass, charge, space, time) interact between them? If so, how do they interact? What happens when they interact? If not, why not? Do you have an experiment to proof why not? Finally, most important, are the dimensions directly interconected? (such as space and time are, can the others also be added?)

[volantis]

According to your QAD, can the dimensions you have been defining and explaining (mass, charge, space, time) interact between them? If so, how do they interact? What happens when they interact? If not, why not? Do you have an experiment to proof why not? Finally, most important, are the dimensions directly interconected? (such as space and time are, can the others also be added?)

This is an excellent question. By reflecting on the interaction of dimensions we can develop a metaphysical understanding of reality, unlike any previous teaching.

According to the APM, physical existence begins with primary angular momentum (electrons and protons). But the angular momentum is, in turn, built from dimensions. This is important. Special effort went into defining dimensions based upon previous definitions (from the Standard Model) but also based upon actual use of dimensions in units.

Angular momentum is a unit, but unlike the units of energy, potential, resistance, current, and others, angular momentum is specifically the unit that gives rise to matter. This could only take place because the Aether unit has a structure that supports and maintains angular momentum. It is the combination of obverse mass (in primary angular momentum) being sustained by reciprocal mass (in the Aether unit) that gives rise to the phenomenon of physical existence. With the other units, however, the dimensions merely produce units with non-material qualities.

This is because dimensions are inherently non-material, themselves. Think about length. There is a length dimension involved in the distance between your eyes and your monitor. The distance is measurable, but the distance is non-material. Time and frequency are measurable, but also non-material. The same goes for mass and charge. Mass is the dimension, that when given a value, measures inertia. Inertia is not a physical thing, but a non-material, dimensional quality. Charge is the dimension, that when given a value, measures electricity. Electricity is any aspect of existence involving charge. Charge is not a thing, but a non-material, dimensional quality. Thus potential has charge, current has charge, resistance has charge, magnetic flux has charge, and many other units have charge.

If we meditate on the nature of length, frequency, mass, and charge, we start to develop a connection to reality that goes deep and also beyond physical reality. Dimensions are definitely a part of physical reality, but they are also a part of non-material reality. Thus, the Aether, which is non-material, also has dimensions. Resistance, friction, temperature, momentum, force, energy, and dozens more units all measure real processes through dimensions, but the processes are themselves non-material.

Everything you can do, whether physically or mentally, involves the manipulation of dimensions. Even our thought processes, emotions, memory, and life essence involves dimensions. Everything is based upon length, frequency, inertia, electricity, or a combination of these dimensions.

How do the dimensions work together? That is the wrong question. The question is how could the dimensions ever not work together? The dimensions are all part of some multifaceted form of existence where all the dimensions are orthogonal to each other, and all exist simultaneously together. We just choose to look at one aspect of this group of dimensions and sort velocity as separate from momentum. That is just a perception on our part. In reality, velocity is never separated from momentum, nor is it separated from any other unit. The reason units and dimensions seem to work together is because they are all part of the same thing.

Is there proof that the dimensions are all united? At this level of existence, we must accept the tautology that dimensions work together. We can observe that the dimensions work together and no other possibility is observed.

Also, consider that dimensions are non-material and yet real. Our mind shares a similar type of existence. Our mind is non-material, and yet we sense that our mind is real. It is interesting that dimensions, the very basis of physical existence, actually has more in common with the mind than it does with physical existence. And if we carefully follow the progression of complexity, where non-material dimensions produce non-material units, except for the one unit of primary angular momentum. And then see how the unit of primary angular momentum (subatomic particles) produce atoms, and atoms produce molecules, and molecules produce even more complex structures. Ultimately, we see a taxonomy of various structures from minerals, to plants, animals, communities, planets, solar systems, galaxies, and on and on.

Everything we experience, including our emotions, arise from these dimensions. The physical arises from the non-material. In the APM, the physical sciences seemlessly merge with the metaphysical sciences. The mind merges with matter. And it all happens by contemplating the observable manifestations of the dimensions.

[Guille]

Volantis, thanks a los for your post and time, your explenation was excelent.

I had thought before about what is the difference between the physical existence an dthe mental existence, and, it is a very basic thing. Physical existence has objects (matter, bodies) which alouds to properties-states (energy, forces, solids, mentals...). It also has was I call "fluids" (which are dimensions) and which aloud for interaction, action and reaction. Mental existenc ehas objects (minds) which alud to properties-states (anger, belief, knowledge, love...). But here comes the one unique difference: while sphysical existence has dimensions, mental existenc ehas no "fluids" which could aloud direct interaction trhoughout mental existence between it's opbjects (minds).

This makes us think of three mayor different interactions:
1. PHYSICAL-PHYSICAL (ex: an apple falls on the grass)
2. MENTAL-PHYSICAL (ex: my mind makes my finguers type these words)
3. MENTAL-PHYSICAL-MENTAL (ex: my mind makes my finguers type these words and then you read them, and think about them (go into your mind)).

There is no MENTAL-MENTAL relationship possible. We sometimes say that when two people think the same thing in the same moment, it is because they have a mental conection. But it's no more than what the situation and form of bein of the subjects in questions that made this.

What do you think about my theory?

Now, secondly, I have one thing to ask you. Maybe dimensions themselves can't interact between themselves, but the consequences of them do. For example, intertia and legth have direct relationship. So does time (change) and intertia, or time and legth. The only one that is a bit more dificult to find relationships with is charge, can you give one similar to these I have given, but with charge and any other of the three dimensions?