Does the Higgs Boson Exist?

In the February 2001 edition of the AIP's Physics News Update, it was stated:

Fermilab's Tevatron machine will resume its operations in March 2001 and will run for five years, and it too will search for the Higgs. Fermilab can, in principle, search for Higgs's as massive as 180 GeV, but CERN's efforts will have helped Fermilab, at least at first, in sifting the incoming returns for signs of the Higgs. With its new higher luminosity (essentially the intensity of the beams), the Tevatron should be able to produce about 10¹⁵ proton-antiproton collisions.

It has now been over 5 years and this is this week's summary of the Higgs boson search:

"Physicists from Fermilab’s Tevatron collider have just reported their most comprehensive summary yet of physics at the highest laboratory energies. At last week’s American Physical Society (APS) meeting in Jacksonville, Florida they delivered dozens of papers on a spectrum of topics, many of which are related in some way to the Higgs boson."

In short, they still have not found it.

"The Higgs is the cornerstone ingredient in the standard model of high energy physics. It is the particle manifestation of the curious mechanism that kicked in at an early moment in the life of the universe: the W and Z bosons (the carriers of the weak force) became endowed with mass while the photon (the carrier of the electromagnetic force) did not. This asymmetry makes the two forces very different in the way they operate in the universe."

Notice how the Higgs is believed to become endowed with mass, but no physical process is identified, neither is there any definition of what "mass" is. Then they say that the photon does not have mass and claim it is the carrier of the electromagnetic force.

First off, the mass and charge are defined specifically as dimensions in the Aether Physics Model. Mass and charge are no more particulate than length or time. But just as there is a finite distance between your eyes and your computer monitor, which can be accurately measured, there is no such particulate thing as "length" which is there to measure. Length is a form of non-material reality, which is measurable and thus real. Mass, charge, and time are similarly different forms of non-material reality.

The Higgs boson is a theoretical construct needed by the Standard Model to complete the theory. Unfortunately, the Standard Model is based upon the wrong understanding of what mass and charge are, so the predicted particles are nothing more than fantasies. Even the W and Z bosons have never been observed. All that has been observed are specific calculated energies, which have been explained in a dimensionless mathematical model and interpreted as "particles." In the Aether Physics Model, the weak force is the proportion of the electrostatic charge to the strong charge. However, the Standard Model does not recognize the strong charge, even though it easily expresses mathematically as the angular momentum of the subatomic particle times the conductance of the Aether.

There is no Higgs boson. All that exists is billions of dollars of wasted taxpayer money, thousands of theoretical papers, and a bunch of physicists praying they will find it soon so they can justify more than 20 years of expensive and time consuming research.

The Aether Physics Model provides the correct understanding of sub-quantum structure, which is a non-material form of reality. Mass is nothing more than a dimension, albeit a very real dimension. In order to understand mass, one has to break away from the concept that physical reality is an ever decreasing size of physical particle. It is as though modern physicists intend to understand the Universe by creating a sharper knife.

The reality is that physical existence arose from non-material existence, as the physics of the Aether Physics Model clearly reveals.

Still Room for New Knowledge

A recent article on Space.com highlights (once again) the incomplete nature of modern physics theories and astrophysics theories. As I show on one of my web pages, other stellar examples do not agree with modern theory, either. In the article about "light echos," I show with NASA's own photos that the light echo theory is flawed. Apparently, the scale of distance used by NASA is far from accurate.

In the article about the Luminous Blue Variable star explosion in galaxy UGC 4904, we at least get a direct admission that modern theory doesn't work, rather than some lame concept like "light echoes."

A recently-observed supernova is making some astrophysicists doubt prevailing theories for how stars die.

The massive star, located in galaxy UGC 4904 about 77 million light-years from Earth in the constellation Lynx, threw off a huge amount of material on October 20, 2004. This star, which may have been what's known as a Luminous Blue Variable (LBV), was mistaken for a supernova, as LBV's often are. In fact, some observers refer to them as "supernova imposters."

Then, in the fall of 2006, the star exploded into a full supernova, much sooner than expected. Dubbed Supernova 2006jc, the dying star's blast wave apparently reached the shell of drifting material released in the earlier outburst in mere hours.

The wave heated the ejected gases to millions of degrees, sparking X-ray emissions of an intensity and duration never before detected. NASA’s Swift satellite recorded X-rays brightening from the supernova for an unprecedented 100 days. All previously observed supernovae have initially appeared bright in X-rays before quickly turning invisible.

"We have never observed a stellar outburst and then later seen the star explode," said University of California at Berkeley astronomer Ryan Foley.

First of all, is a "blast wave" a technical term? What is the blast wave made out of that it can heat ejected gases to millions of degrees and spark super intense X-ray emissions? If the X-ray emissions are secondary, and the "blast wave" struck matter to produce X-rays, then the "blast wave" cannot be made out of photons or matter. In order for the so-called "blast wave" to move so fast it had to be a gravity wave (a ripple in the fabric of space-time, or Aether).

Not only did this "blast wave" excite X-rays in its own debris field, but when the "blast wave" arrived at our Sun it also produced x-rays on it, too. The so-called blast waves are gravity waves, and they often travel faster than the speed of light. So in this case, our Sun released intense bursts of X-ray flares more than a day before the associated gamma ray burst from the LBV reached our Sun as seen in the solar X-ray flare graph below (click on image to see full size):



Scientists at Caltech and MIT have spent lots of NSF money building a gravity wave detector in space, but have not yet reported a single gravity wave. However, by simply watching the solar X-ray data, I have witnessed hundreds of separate gravity wave incidents passing through our solar system.

It is clear what the problem is. If gravity waves are ripples in space-time, and they arrive before gamma rays do, then the fabric of space-time must be very real and independent from photons. Or in other words, there really must be an Aether in which photons travel and which can be mechanically modulated separate from electromagnetic radiation.

Light exerts force on matter

In our paper, A New Foundation for Physics, we provide a simple equation showing that photons exert force over an area. The equation is written:

phtn = forc * area

Light is further quantified as photon times frequency:

ligt = phtn * freq

We give the example of the Crooke's radiometer for the above equations. As photons strike the surface of the radiometer vanes they impart angular momentum, which manifests as force over an area. Since the black vanes absorb light (photons) and the silver vanes reflect light, the angular momentum is transfered to the dark vanes more than the silver vanes, thus resulting in the spinning.

Scientists at the University of Chicago have now used laser light to exert a force on soapy water, which creates a jet stream within the water. In the case of the soapy water, the surfactant in the soap apparently breaks down the binding force between water molecules, thus allowing them to move relative to each other with much less resistance. The naturally absorptive water then absorbs photons, which exerts force upon an area the width of the laser beam. The force pushes the freely moving water molecules into motion relative to surrounding water molecules.

The same effect occurs with sunlight shining on asteroids. A recent news release on EurekAlert describes an observation of the YORP effect on a near Earth asteroid.

YORP is a torque due to sunlight shining on the surfaces of asteroids and meteoroids and warming their surfaces, leading to a gentle recoil effect as the heat is emitted.

The "official" explanation of "a gentle recoil effect as heat is emitted" is nonsense as heat does not inherently have mass, nor is heat capable of causing motion. Heat is the measure of temperature associated with distributed motion within a medium, heat is not the motion's cause. The cause of a change in motion is the force associated with collision of bodies with mass.

In the Standard Model, the photon is considered to be massless. In the Aether Physics Model, the photon is said to have "net zero mass." There is a big difference between the two concepts. In the Standard Model there is no mass at all. In the Aether Physics Model a photon possesses half angular momentum due to electrons and half angular momentum due to positrons. The equal portions of electron and positron angular momentum cancel each other out, yet both angular momenta remain within the photon.

Thus, when a photon is absorbed into an appropriate atom it can produce electrons, positrons, or both, depending upon the atomic structure. In any case, when the photon is absorbed into an atom it exerts a force upon an area, as several physical observations in nature clearly demonstrate.

Electron Binding Energy Equation

Last night, I finally succeeded in developing the electron binding energy equation for the 1s orbitals of all the atomic elements. This is a major milestone in the Aether Physics Model, as it is our first completed equation showing quantum mechanics in our new and improved model of quantum physics.

The equation was derived using the principles and equations already developed in the Aether Physics Model. This has strongly raised my hopes that the nuclear binding energy and atomic spectral equations will soon follow. Now that I understand the geometry of subatomic binding in atoms, it is just a matter of time before a complete and unequivacal model of quantum structure is known to the world.

Today, I have started writing the paper, which will be submitted to various journals. I'll keep you informed of the progress.

New Edition of Infinite Energy Magazine now Available

The September/October 2006 edition of Infinite Energy magazine is now available online:
http://www.infinite-energy.com/

Infinite Energy Magazine Article

I just received my proof copy of Infinite Energy Magazine volume 12, issue 69. The editors did a fine job of presenting our paper, A New Foundation for Physics. However, I was much more pleased with the other articles and authors in the magazine.

The article immediately preceeding ANFP was written by Dr. Cynthia Kolb Whitney, a very qualified physicist and mathematician from MIT. Her article is titled, "Is Optical Detection of Linear Velocity Possible?" She systematically reveals four specific experiments, which do not support Einstein's Special Relativity Theory, and also points out a valid complaint about Einstein specifically excluding acceleration of the coordinate system from his theory. By excluding acceleration, he excluded the rotation of the coordinate system, which means that any experiment performed on the surface of the Earth is effectively disqualified, thus making SRT untestable.

What is really exciting is that Dr. Whitney's article primes the reader's interest in an Aether theory, which is followed immediately by the Aether Physics Model.

I am even more excited by the fact that I personally discussed the Aether Physics Model briefly with Dr. Whitney at the Physical Interpretations of Relativity Theory conference in London, last week. I had no idea her article would precede our article in the same issue. In her presentation at the conference, she mentioned a decades old hypothesis that the photon always maintains a connection to its source. The Aether Physics Model reveals this exact same photon structure, that the photon always remains connected to its source, and this connection is quantified by the Compton function of 1-cos(theta).

I really have to hand it to Christy Frazier, the managing editor of Infinite Energy Magazine, for putting together a well synchronized issue.

I'm now looking forward to reading the rest of the magazine. BTW, the magazine's web site is http://www.infinite-energy.com/.

PIRT Conference a Success

We thank Dr. M.C. Duffy for inviting us to the Physical Interpretations of Relativity Theory conference to present our paper, A New Foundation for Physics. More than 50 engineers, physicists, and chemists presented their own papers. Several of the papers presented related in some way to the Aether Physics Model, and we are following up by studying these papers in greater detail.

For some reason, the papers of all the physicists were not made available before the conference. This made it somewhat difficult for us to prepare for other's presentations, and others to prepare for ours. However, due to some last minute networking, we managed to find several scientists interested in looking further into the Aether Physics Model. These scientists, in turn, have put us in contact with yet others who have been working along similar theories.

In addition, our paper will be published with the conference proceedings, which will allow future researchers to further investigate the theory.

It is only fair to say that not everybody was interested in the Aether Physics Model. One scientist refused to even discuss the theory with me, simply because I did not have a degree. It was a stark reminder that some scientists are just as prejudiced in person, as they are on the Internet. But such trivial setbacks are meaningless when 12 others listened with interest. Perhaps others would have shown more interest in the theory if it weren't for the language barriers.

Still, we would have been delighted to have just one person show deep interest. To have 12 scientists show interest was very good.

We are now busy following up on all the new knowledge we encountered, and also actively discussing the theory with several qualified scientists. Stay tuned for new developments.