Group Theory and the Aether Physics Model

The following is a letter I emailed to Jim Bourassa and Mario Livio (author of "The Equation That Couldn't Be Solved").

Hi Jim and Mario,

Group Theory applies decisively to the Aether Physics Model, although I profess no expertise in this area. Just as Group Theory sets rules for groups, rather than the objects of those groups, the Aether Physics Model explains physics by the actions of space-time, rather than the actions of the objects inhabiting that space-time.

There are practical applications for the Aether Physics Model that play directly into
metaphysics. One can look at a physical object and see its objective characteristics. That is exactly what modern physics does. But one can also look at the environment of the physical object to see the subjective characteristics associated with objects. That is what metaphysicians do.

The Aether Physics Model thus gives both the subjective and objective views of physical existence; the non-material field in which physical existence exists.

For all the intelligence of modern physicists and their ability to comprehend and apply Group Theory, it is amazing that they vehemently deny the Aether's existence. The Aether, particularly as it is quantified in the Aether Physics Model, is the reciprocal view of objective reality. And just as in Group Theory, this reciprocal view is related to the normal view, but is a completely different group altogether.

It is only a matter of time before someone skilled in Group Theory comes along and realizes the utility and importance of the Aether Physics Model. All of the structures of physical existence can be expressed as structures of space-time, hence the relationship of the Golden Ratio to growing systems (flowers, crystals, populations, body structures, etc). As Jim pointed out, the Golden Ratio in the Aether Physics Model is reflected in the anomalous magnetic moments of the proton and electron, which actually originates in the structure of the Aether unit as shown in the APM. In our book, I provide a whole section devoted to generating various physical structures based upon "Aether numbers," which are actually groups of Aether units.

The Pythagorean musical scale and the structure of atomic nuclei (Linus Pauling's Spheron model) are further examples of Group Theory at work in the Aether Physics Model. It logically follows that if frequency scales, atomic nuclei, and subatomic particles can be quantified in terms of Aether units, then all of physical existence can be quantified in terms of Aether units. But since most of the physical Universe is "empty" space-time, the geometrical analysis of Aether units (includes
fractals) can quantify much more than can objective measurements.

Of even greater interest, since conductance is shown to be the quantification of emotions and feelings, and conductance is a reciprocal unit, one can easily hypothesize that the mind is further quantifiable in terms of other reciprocal units. Just as neuroscientists can now measure one's feelings through conductance, it may be possible to measure ones memory, ability for logic, and other characteristics of mind. This is because reciprocal units as a group apply to the Aether, and if one of those units applies to one aspect of mind (feelings/emotions) then the other units of the Aether likely apply to other aspects of mind. These units include Gforce and capacitance. Such an hypothesis is not without basis, as the Buddhist and Hindu masters have long observed the strong similarities between space-time and mind.

I hope I live long enough to see the Aether Physics Model substantially developed. The power of this theory is far greater than anything mankind has previously achieved in theoretical physics. The APM not only quantifiably unifies the physical forces, but also quantifiably unifies all of physical and non-material existence.

Dave

Are We Quacks?

Of course, I'm always questioning whether in fact we may indeed be quacks. After all, why would a physics theory claiming to have the Unified Force Theory and the precise geometry of quantum structure be so slow in gaining wide-spread acceptance? Surely the top physicists of today would be able to spot a good theory when they saw one, right?

I recently had a discussion with a top-notch PhD physicist professor, Warren Siegler. He teaches physics at CNY Institute for Theoretical Physics at SUNY. What started the discussion was a web page he had posted that describes the qualities of quacks. I simply wanted to know whether a quantified theory based upon empirical data would be considered a quack theory. This ended up giving me the unexpected opportunity to actually defend the theory. To my surprise, his only response was to find ways to ignore the theory.

With his permission, I have posted the complete discussion between us online at:
http://www.16pi2.com/quack.htm

One would think it would be easy to simply find errors in the theory being presented, but instead, Prof. Siegel was intent to respond to my theory by touting other theories. It was like trying to tell a Baptist about Buddhism. Every comment about Buddhism would be followed by a quote from the Bible that both judges the error of Buddhism and praises the wonders of Christianity.

Check it out. See why it is so difficult to present a new physics theory to people who think they already have the answers.

Evidence for APM Photon Quantification

In the May 31, 2006 issue of New Scientist is an article titled, "Solar power - Seriously souped up." In this article, writer Herb Brody explains:

When an electron in a semiconducting material becomes free to move about and
conduct current, it leaves behind a vacant site in the crystal, called a hole;
the electron-hole pair is called an exciton.

The exciton in the Aether Physics Model is the Aether (hole) and quantum angular momentum (electron in this case) pair. He goes on to explain:

The amount of photon energy needed to create an exciton in a particular material
is called the band gap

In the Standard Model, the photon is said to be a packet of electromagnetic energy.

Each of these packets of electromagnetic energy, no matter how potent, can still
liberate only one electron. Anything left over will dribble away as heat and
contribute exactly zero to the device's electrical output.

In the Aether Physics Model, we take exception to this type of terminology. A photon is supposed to be the quantum of light. But in the SM, the packet of electromagnetic radiation has a different magnitude for each frequency of light, therefore there are an infinite number of photon "sizes." This contradicts the meaning of "quantum."

In the APM, the photon is quantified precisely as a quantum of electromagnetic radiation equal to the angular momentum of the electron (Planck's constant) times the speed of light:

phtn = h * c

Further, light is quantified as the frequency at which these quantum photons are produced:

ligt = phtn * freq

Thus when the light reaches its target and is absorbed, its velocity component is removed and we get:

ligt/c = enrg

The energy in the equation above is the so-called "energy packet" of the SM. It can be clearly seen that the photon is not equal to the energy packet, they are two completely different concepts. Thus, when theory states that a single photon (energy packet) can produce multiple electrons, this is providing evidence for the APM view of photons. With regard to the SM view of photons, the article states:

How the multiple excitons are produced remains a bit of a mystery. According to
Klimov, when an energetic photon strikes the material, the electron jumps to
what he calls a "virtual" state in which it has actually gained more energy than
was carried by the photon; this seeming contradiction is permitted because the
virtual state lasts for such a brief time. The hyper-excited electron will
transfer some of its energy to another, unexcited electron essentially by
bumping into it. The result: two energised electrons from a single photon.

Typical of the SM, when something isn't understood it is called a "mystery" and is explained in terms of "virtual" physics. In this case, the virtual physics is a "virtual state." When the Casimir effect is explained by others, it is done by inventing a "virtual photon." Once could literally say that the Standard Model of physics "virtually exists." but the Aether Physics Model is completely discrete. In the APM, all physical structures are precisely quantified, and therefore all the physical processes can be understood in terms of discrete movements.

Explained from the perspective of the APM, photons are arriving at a target atom at a given frequency. Only portions of the angular momentum of each photon are absorbed, depending on the distance and magnitude of the photon source. Thus a given "wave packet," which is really a quantity of angular momentum per a given time, has within it (depending upon frequency) more or less angular momentum than a single electron. Thus high frequency wave packets will have more angular momentum than a single electron and may produce more than one electron per wave packet.

The observation that more than one electron can be produced from a high frequency light source is physical evidence strongly supporting the Aether Physics Model interpretation of photons. The APM provides a discrete explanation for the observations of Schaller and Klimov without resorting to mysteries, virtual physics, or any other type of non-sense.