"state Of Denial"

[humanbydefault]

I'll try to express my present disatisfaction with the way modern physics have been mishandled by those in charge of interpreting what could be part of something pretty important to all of us, ESPECIALLY IN THIS FORUM:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>REALITY<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Let's "disect" some of those "human-concepts" using nothing less than the internet encyclopedia as reference ... pretty solid, don't you think?

"The Maxwell theory predicts that the energy of a light wave depends only on its intensity, not on its frequency; nevertheless, several independent types of experiments show that the energy imparted by light to atoms depends only on the light's frequency, not on its intensity. For example, some chemical reactions can be provoked only by light of frequency higher than a certain threshold; light of lower frequency, no matter how intense, is incapable of exciting the reaction. Similarly, electrons can be ejected from a metal plate by shining light of sufficiently high frequency on it (the photoelectric effect); the energy of the ejected electron is related only to the light's frequency, not to its intensity.
At the same time, investigations of blackbody radiation carried out over four decades (1860–1900) by various researchers[19] culminated in Max Planck's hypothesis[20][21] that the energy of any system that absorbs or emits electromagnetic radiation of frequency ν is an integer multiple of an energy quantum E = hν. As shown by Albert Einstein,[2][3] some form of energy quantization must be assumed to account for the thermal equilibrium observed between matter and electromagnetic radiation.
Since the Maxwell theory of light allows for all possible energies of electromagnetic radiation, most physicists assumed initially that the energy quantization resulted from some unknown constraint on the matter that absorbs or emits the radiation. In 1905, Einstein was the first to propose that energy quantization was a property of electromagnetic radiation itself.[2] Although he accepted the validity of Maxwell's theory, Einstein pointed out that many anomalous experiments could be explained if the energy of a Maxwellian light wave were localized into point-like quanta that move independently of one another, even if the wave itself is spread continuously over space.[2] In 1909[3] and 1916,[5] Einstein showed that, if Planck's law of black-body radiation is accepted, the energy quanta must also carry momentum p = h / λ, making them full-fledged particles. This photon momentum was observed experimentally[22] by Arthur Compton, for which he received the Nobel Prize in 1927. The pivotal question was then: how to unify Maxwell's wave theory of light with its experimentally observed particle nature? The answer to this question occupied Albert Einstein for the rest of his life,[23] and was solved in quantum electrodynamics and its successor, the Standard Model.


As you can see, I have underlined, increased the type and incline the angle of some words. It wasn't [non-the-less] the unintentional fruit of pure coincident ...but the best arguments I could come-up to prove you how wrong those "human theories" are been physically interpreted.

As you can see... the first "victime" of my "amplification" was the "fact" that "electrons" are literally EJECTED from their original orbits so they can "fly" out just like birds in a free environment (God forgive us for being so blind!)

It seems that the effective observation [although incomplete I must point out] of certain "constraints" showed by MATTER when it came to the absroption and eventual scattering of energy was obsolete according to the latest "conjectures"... how sad!

But the most OUTRAGEOUS statement came from the "FATHER OF MODERN PHYSICS" HIMSELF:

HE SAID: "That the quantization is [was] caused by the property of electromagnetic radiation itself" ... (WITH ALL DUE RESPECT: THAT'S FALSE AND WRONG!)

First! Electrons were never ejected from anywhere... They are the result of a "manufacturing" process occuring inside the "atomic oscillators" or "STANDING WAVES" originated in deeper levels of the atomic nucleus.

SECOND! The "E" [energy of the quantum] manifested in the form of "F" [frequency and equivalently its "wavelength"] DID depended on the "CAPACITY" of those atomic oscillators in the first place... HOWEVER!
SOMETHING TOO IMPORTANT WAS OMITTED BY Einstein himself... Something he was not ready to believe in or even accept and when he finally gave up, he couldn't understand its puzzling existence:The eather!

IT IS THE EATHER WHAT DEFINES WHEN TO "TRANSFER" ENERGY FROM ONE "PHYSICAL STATUS" TO A DIFFERENT ONE IN NATURE (!)

An electron is "produced" and/or "manufactured" as external energy [light or E-M energy from a battery...] is absorbed [first] and eventually scattered back into our "local eather." The physical status that defines it as "one electron charge" is CONDITIONED by the "local eather" where "IT" will eventually exist!

WHY ARE ELECTRONS OBSERVED TO HAVE MORE "KINETIC ENERGY" OR "P" [momentum when compared to "particles"] as they are scattered from different atomic orbits with different energy-levels?

BECAUSE once those quanta [identified as "electrons"] become in "direct contact" with our "environment" [local eather] the innate PROPERTIES OF THE VACUUM [ITSELF] will "FORCE" the "extra energy" "pre-processed" in those atomic oscillators to be "transformed" into "P" or kinetic energy. IF kinetic energy is no longer accepted by the laws of physics then the mentioned "plus or extra energy" involved in the scattered quanta will again be transformed to LIGHT! YES INTO PHOTONS WITH THE EQUIVALENT ENERGY TO THAT NOT ACCEPTED BY THE EATHER itself!!!

That's why accelerated charges will emit photons inside particle accelerators!

That's why Gamma radiation will "produce" pairs of photons during strange scatterings observed when those high-energy rays [Gamma rays] become in "direct contact" with the eather-caused-limitations!

That's why I said that "the two slit experiment" couldn't have a different result than the puzzling one we are not capable of understanding!

It's the eather and its unknown properties what finally determines the magnitude of "E" "P" and other forms of energy according to its constantly ondulating "fabric."

Einstein believed that electromagnetism had its own innate properties and they were the only reasons for the quantization fact... but he was wrong! It was the eather all along!

HBD

[Lloyd Gillespie]

And why wouldn't it be the aether, HBD? The aether exists as two opposing fields in one___the cold low entropy field, and the hot high entropy field. This is what physics fails to recognize___ITA,S___It's The Aether, Stupid! Don't you suppose cold and hot aether storms could create electro-magnetism and gravity, quite easily___with enough time...?

Thanks HBD,
Regards,
Lloyd

I'll try to express my present disatisfaction with the way modern physics have been mishandled by those in charge of interpreting what could be part of something pretty important to all of us, ESPECIALLY IN THIS FORUM:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>REALITY<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

IT IS THE EATHER WHAT DEFINES WHEN TO "TRANSFER" ENERGY FROM ONE "PHYSICAL STATUS" TO A DIFFERENT ONE IN NATURE (!)

It's the eather and its unknown properties what finally determines the magnitude of "E" "P" and other forms of energy according to its constantly ondulating "fabric."

HBD

[humanbydefault]

"...And why wouldn't it be the aether, HBD? The aether exists as two opposing fields in one..." [from your quote above]

You couldn't be more right this time! The "EATHER" or "VACUUM" is the result of two opposing "SPINNING" fields in endless interaction! What I see as "local eather" is the THIRD field or the direct result of both original fields [you mentioned above] but this time with its own properties and parameters.

It takes us back to the basic concept of "STANDING WAVES"!!

When two waves, fields in a sense... interact in a form of interference, they will still be there but the conjugation of both in the patterns will bring into the "picture" a new "REALITY" [my local eather!]. You would not be able to separate or differenciate those two interacting fields anymore, my friend, all you can measure or observe from that point on is a new energy-level with its own "space-time" properties and physical laws [only appliables to the 3D space found inside its boundaries.

You can't separate "protons" from "electrons" for the same reason! In a sense... Protons, neutrons and electrons [INSIDE THE ATOMIS STRUCTURE] are just that! Spinning levels of energy structured in overlapping and superimpossed patterns of standing waves... ALL ORIGINATED FROM THE BONDS FORMED IN DEEPER LEVELS OF THE ATOM ITSELF.

HOWEVER! What we [physicists] consider "sub-atomic particles" and have given them the name of "protons", "electrons" "neutrons" etc, etc... are just the eventual scattering of energy from those atomic structures I've just explained countless times in this forum.

The fact that they were coming from the atom [while in state of decay or after a particle collission took place] NEVER MEANT THAT THEY WERE AN INTEGRAL PART OF THE ATOM AS WE OFTEN CAN OBSERVE THEM AFTER THE SCATTERING OCCUR !!!!

THIS IS THE PROBLEM [THE WAY I SEE IT] WITH TODAY'S PHYSICAL INTERPRETATION OF "REALITY."

One last issue that I didn't understand in your last comment:

Who was the word "stupid" destined to? Would you be more precised in the target of your insulting comment? Is it me "the stupid" or the eather?

I see you became "moderator" lately, I respect that and I hope being able to share my ideas just as I did with past ones... You know that I have always had a high opinion of you as a person... should I've been forced now to reconsider my position?

HUMABYDEFAULT

[humanbydefault]

Atomic excitation

"A simple example of this concept comes by considering the hydrogen atom.
The ground state of the hydrogen atom corresponds to having the atom's single electron in the lowest possible orbit (that is, the spherically symmetric "1s" wavefunction, which has the lowest possible quantum numbers). By giving the atom additional energy (for example, by the absorption of a photon of an appropriate energy), the electron is able to move into an excited state (one with one or more quantum numbers greater than the minimum possible). If the photon has too much energy, the electron will cease to be bound to the atom, and the atom will become ionised.
Once the electron is in its excited state, we deem the hydrogen atom to be in its excited state. The atom may return to a lower excited state, or the ground state, by emitting a photon with a characteristic energy. Emission of photons from atoms in various excited states leads to an electromagnetic spectrum showing a series of characteristic emission lines (including, in the case of the hydrogen atom, the Lyman series, the Balmer series, the Paschen series, the Brackett series...)" [WIKIPEDIA]

I SIMPLY DON'T AGREE WITH THAT ASSESTMENT AT ALL!!!

No electron [as a so-called "sub-atomic particle"] was ever part of the atomic structure!

According to the way I see REALITY all there is in the atomic structure is a multi-layer representation of multiple bonds as the consequence of interacting and overlapping standing waves (!)

NO ELECTRIC CHARGE! NO DEFINED "MASS"***! Simply an increasing multiphase or realities superpossed one another.

Back to the "modified letters" in the quote above:

WHEN ENERGY WAS ABSORBED NO "ELECTRON" WAS JUMPING TO A HIGHER LEVEL, ALL THAT HAPPENED WAS THAT THOSE "EMPTY SPACES" [INTEGRAL PART OF THE STANDING WAVE PATTERN] WHEN INTERFERING WAVES CANCELLED EACH OTHER OUT ON THE "SPOT" WERE "FILLED IN" WITH THAT EXTERNAL ENERGY!!!

THEREFORE... THE CHANCES OF OBSERVING "MASS" AS A NON-DEFINED DUST OR AS "ATOMIC DOUGHNOUT" [AS BEING LITERALLY NAMED BY PHYSICISTS BEFORE] WAS REPLACED BY A NEW "SPINNING E-M ENERGY" GIVING THE IMPRESSION THAT THE "ASSUMED ELECTRON" SIMPLY LEFT THE NEIGHBORHOOD" (!)

THE PROCESS STAYS AS LONG AS THE ENERGY SCAPES IN THE FORM OF A NEW PHOTON... GIVEN THE EXTERNAL CONDITIONS FOR THAT TO HAPPEN OF COURSE!

IT IS IMPERATIVE TO CHANGE THE OLD WAY OF LOOKING AT THE PHYSICAL REALITY AND THAT'S ALL I'M TRYING TO TAKE TO THOSE OF YOU INTERESTING AND WILLING TO AT LEAST CONSIDER MY THOUGHTS...

*** an aclaratory note: No defined "mass" as a coherent one! Of course mass is defined by its magnitude... Not because "mass" is a quantifiable concept in the universe.. but because the pattern that brings "mass" into the equation of our REALITY is QUANTIZED!!! See the difference here? Standing waves DO HAVE A DEFINED SHAPE, STRENGTH AND PHYSICAL PARAMETERS [SPACE, SPINNING SHAPE, etc.] "Mass" is an integral part of the interacting energy-pattern [more like a side effect of it].

HUMANBYDEFAULT

[humanbydefault]

"A linear combination of atomic orbitals or LCAO is a quantum superposition of atomic orbitals and a technique for calculating molecular orbitals in quantum chemistry [1]. In quantum mechanics, electron configurations of atoms are described as wavefunctions. In mathematical sense, these wave functions are the basis set of functions, the basis functions, which describe the electrons of a given atom. In chemical reactions, orbital wavefunctions are modified, i.e. the electron cloud shape is changed, according to the type of atoms participating in the chemical bond..." [wikipedia]

WHY WOULD THE SO-CALLED "electron cloud" CHANGE ITS SHAPE? because shape means "STANDING WAVE PATTERN"!!!! It will be changed during molecular bonds because "A NEW LOCAL EATHER" WAS BORNE AS THE RESULT!!!

Think of it this way:

Remember the sort of attraction I forcasted to happen when two opposite SPIN patterns meet?
We've seen this all the time in "real life" in a sort of a virtual way during magnets pulled to each other as the attraction exert by a "virtual sum" of millions of correlated spins in the ferromagnetic material. Magnetism as observed when two magnets attract to each other is the basic principle of the entire "chemistry."

The difference here is clear enough for any of us to see:

Would you be able to imagine the strength of the attraction as the result of two opposite spins with a differential of polarity-strength within the range [distance] of RESONANCE?

WHAT I'M SAYING IS THAT TWO OR MORE [ATOMIC] ORBITS (THE OUTERMOST ONE LOCATED WHERE "ASSUMED ELECTRONS "FLY AROUND" LIKE SATELLITES) GET CLOSE ENOUGH TO "FEEL" THE PULL... A MOLECULE IS ABOUT TO FORM!!!

The word "feel" means in physics that the mutual wave-orbital interaction becomes something close to a "resonance box." where both incoming or interacting [spinning] waves perfectly FIT between both atoms (!)

Casimir discovered the strength of that force! He only measured the effect of vaccum-waves between two solid plaques... now imagine the strength that will rise from two very short but powerful spinning patterns [miniature magnets] in full-contact!!!

Think about it!

HUMANBYDEFAULT

[Lloyd Gillespie]

"...And why wouldn't it be the aether, HBD? The aether exists as two opposing fields in one..." [from your quote above]

One last issue that I didn't understand in your last comment:

Who was the word "stupid" destined to? Would you be more precised in the target of your insulting comment? Is it me "the stupid" or the eather?

I see you became "moderator" lately, I respect that and I hope being able to share my ideas just as I did with past ones... You know that I have always had a high opinion of you as a person... should I've been forced now to reconsider my position?

HUMABYDEFAULT

HBD, the comment "It's the aether, stupid " does not refer to you. You are fine, and I enjoy your theorizing, very much. In the 90's President Clinton's team coined the phrase, "It's the economy, stupid." I just meant it as a figure of speech, in describing much of humanity's and the physics' community, not understanding the simple dynamics of the aether. Continue as you have been, with my blessing. Some day I'll get around to pointing out a few differences we may have, but for now keep up the interesting posts.

Regards,
Lloyd

[humanbydefault]

That's what I thought... I knew you were different than some few rotten apples one find here and there.

You have a merry christmas and a happy new year too!

Same for Mike and those who visit my posts or I comment in theirs.

HBD

[mkirkpatrick]

That's what I thought... I knew you were different than some few rotten apples one find here and there.

You have a merry christmas and a happy new year too!

Same for Mike and those who visit my posts or I comment in theirs.

HBD

All the very best to you my friend,I wish you a happy Xmas and a prosperous
new year.


warm regards michael.

[bottomlander]

THIS IS THE PROBLEM [THE WAY I SEE IT] WITH TODAY'S PHYSICAL INTERPRETATION OF "REALITY."

One last issue that I didn't understand in your last comment:
Who was the word "stupid" destined to? Would you be more precised in the target of your insulting comment? Is it me "the stupid" or the eather?
[/quote]

In the 90's President Clinton's team coined the phrase, "It's the economy, stupid." I just meant it as a figure of speech, in describing much of humanity's and the physics' community, not understanding the simple dynamics of the aether.
[/quote]Reply

---- ---- ----

It is a sad thing that for all mainstream physicists, once they saw any articles containing the word ether/aether or eather, etc. they stopped reading with an instant impression STUPID.

The irony truth is, humans are too difficult to develop useful modern models with "strict vacuum". Actually, those standard theories like those Field Concept, Spacetime Continuum, Quantum Fields, Hyperspace, .... all are ether-like.
It seems that except Loop Qantization (Loop Quantum Gravity), too difficult for Strict Vacuum to work as a platform.

I do believe that once TOE being confirmed, it is ether-like (non-material ether) rather than vacuum-like.

[humanbydefault]

THIS IS THE PROBLEM [THE WAY I SEE IT] WITH TODAY'S PHYSICAL INTERPRETATION OF "REALITY."
"It is a sad thing that for all mainstream physicists, once they saw any articles containing the word ether/aether or eather, etc. they stopped reading with an instant impression STUPID.

The irony truth is, humans are too difficult to develop useful modern models with "strict vacuum". Actually, those standard theories like those Field Concept, Spacetime Continuum, Quantum Fields, Hyperspace, .... all are ether-like.
It seems that except Loop Qantization (Loop Quantum Gravity), too difficult for Strict Vacuum to work as a platform.

I do believe that once TOE being confirmed, it is ether-like (non-material ether) rather than vacuum-like".

I couldn't agree more with you my friend. I'll plan to start writing about some rather controversial and "taken-for-granted theories" that will confirm your words about the roll of the eather in all this.

HUMANBYDEFAULT

"WELCOME TO THE ALIEN WORLD OF LOGIC AND COMMON SENSE!"