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 - 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 –
1) All experiments to probe a central structure of the electron have been
negative.
2) 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.
3) 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:
1. Aspden, Harold. Energy Science Tutorial #5. 1997. URL:
http://www.energyscience.co.uk/tu/tu05.htm
2. Cagle, Charles. Electromagnetotoroid model. 1999. URL:
http://www.singtech.com
3. Cameron, Jeff. Transdimensional Technologies. 2001. URL:
http://www.tdimension.com/
4. Crane, Oliver et al. Central Oscillator and Space-Time Quanta Medium.
Universal Expert Publishers, June 2000, English Edition. ISBN 3-9521259-2-X
5. Mishin, A.M. (Levels of aetheric density) URL:
http://alexfrolov.narod.ru/chernetsky.htm
6. Mishin, A.M. The Ether Model as Result of the New Empirical Conception.
International Academy of MegaSciences, St. Petersburg, Russia URL:
http://alexfrolov.narod.ru/mi-paper.htm
7. Wolff, Milo. Exploring the Physics of the Unknown Universe. Technotran
Press, Manhattan Beach, CA, 1990. ISBN 0-9627787-0-2. URL:
http://members.tripod.com/mwolff
|