Warning to students ! Everything on this website is nothing more than my own, personal ideas about physics and are not the generally accepted conventional views of physics. So, if you have come to this website for research and study, I strongly recommend that you leave this site and go to a more reputable site instead. Physics is a confusing enough subject as it is without me adding chaos to that confusion and I wouldn't want to be responsible for you failing your exams. If, however, you have come to this website out of pure curiosity . . Read on !
If you have come to this website because of a letter that I sent to you, thank you for your time. If you wish, you can go straight to the section under the heading of The model as you will have already read the following introduction. If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to contact me at [email protected].
If you have come to this website because of a letter that I sent to you, thank you for your time. If you wish, you can go straight to the section under the heading of The model as you will have already read the following introduction. If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to contact me at [email protected].
Is it possible that the elementary particles that make up the universe pulsate ?
When I say 'pulsate', I mean a regular, periodic fluctuation in the amount of energy that a particle possesses. More specifically, I am wondering if they are switching OFF then ON again in a continuous process, where they change from possessing a certain amount of energy one moment, then gradually wind down to a point where they have zero energy, then gradually re-emerge again back to the original amount of energy they possessed? If this were the case, it would obviously be happening at a rapid rate that has so far evaded our detection, but, this is not an idea that i have plucked out of thin air. There are five main reasons why I started to think along these lines.
One is The positive and negative solutions to relativistic equations. The negative solutions to these equations are sometimes interpreted as representing the presence of negative mass/energy, an idea which I do not subscribe to. But, the thought occurred to me, what if they were not describing the presence of negative energy, but, rather the temporary absence of positive energy that would occur if the particles were pulsating?
When I say 'pulsate', I mean a regular, periodic fluctuation in the amount of energy that a particle possesses. More specifically, I am wondering if they are switching OFF then ON again in a continuous process, where they change from possessing a certain amount of energy one moment, then gradually wind down to a point where they have zero energy, then gradually re-emerge again back to the original amount of energy they possessed? If this were the case, it would obviously be happening at a rapid rate that has so far evaded our detection, but, this is not an idea that i have plucked out of thin air. There are five main reasons why I started to think along these lines.
One is The positive and negative solutions to relativistic equations. The negative solutions to these equations are sometimes interpreted as representing the presence of negative mass/energy, an idea which I do not subscribe to. But, the thought occurred to me, what if they were not describing the presence of negative energy, but, rather the temporary absence of positive energy that would occur if the particles were pulsating?
Relativistic equations describe how a system changes over time, so, I wondered is it possible that the positive and negative solutions found in relativistic equations could be a mathematical indication of a pulsation, where + mass/energy solutions describe the presence of mass/energy and – mass/energy solutions describe the absence of energy that once existed in the form of a particle?
The second reason is the existence of virtual particles. Particles such as the electron are surrounded by a 'cloud' of virtual particles that appear then disappear in vacuum fluctuations, which could be viewed as a brief pulsation of borrowed energy from the vacuum. But, if particles such as the electron were pulsating, is it possible that the virtual particles are not appearing due to random fluctuations in the vacuum, but rather, they are being stimulated into existence in a systematic way by the pulsation of the electron? Vacuum fluctuations which are due to a chain of cause and effect would make more sense than just random fluctuations that have no apparent cause.
On the surface, this idea may appear to contravene the laws governing the conservation of energy, but, If all the particles in the universe were pulsating it would mean that all the mass/energy in the universe is constantly appearing, disappearing then re-appearing again. The obvious question is, where does the energy/mass disappear to?
The second reason is the existence of virtual particles. Particles such as the electron are surrounded by a 'cloud' of virtual particles that appear then disappear in vacuum fluctuations, which could be viewed as a brief pulsation of borrowed energy from the vacuum. But, if particles such as the electron were pulsating, is it possible that the virtual particles are not appearing due to random fluctuations in the vacuum, but rather, they are being stimulated into existence in a systematic way by the pulsation of the electron? Vacuum fluctuations which are due to a chain of cause and effect would make more sense than just random fluctuations that have no apparent cause.
On the surface, this idea may appear to contravene the laws governing the conservation of energy, but, If all the particles in the universe were pulsating it would mean that all the mass/energy in the universe is constantly appearing, disappearing then re-appearing again. The obvious question is, where does the energy/mass disappear to?
Of course, I can only speculate about possible answers to this question. But, the idea of the existence of dimensions other than the four we experience has gained a great deal of acceptance over the years. With this in mind, it doesn't seem at all unreasonable to speculate that the pulsating mass/energy of the fundamental particles could be welling up from these additional dimensions and disappearing back into them again. This would mean that the mass/energy has not disappeared in the sense that it has turned into nothing, but rather, it has become no longer observable in our 4 dimensions of space/time, but still exists in other dimensions.
If this were the case then the energy of the universe would remain at a constant, but it would just be continuously changing its state by existing in our 4 dimensions one moment, then returning to the extra dimensions the next moment. This would give us a reason for the positive and negative solutions to the equation E=Mc2.
If this were the case then the energy of the universe would remain at a constant, but it would just be continuously changing its state by existing in our 4 dimensions one moment, then returning to the extra dimensions the next moment. This would give us a reason for the positive and negative solutions to the equation E=Mc2.
This brings me to my third reason which is more cosmological. The preconditions of the 'Big bang' have to allow for the universe to be condensed into a singularity and for that singularity to spring into existence from apparent nothingness and begin to expand. If the fundamental particles were pulsating in the sense that they were appearing then disappearing from our 4 dimensions, it could offer a plausible explanation of how a singularity could appear from 'nowhere' by 'pulsating' into existence.
The same principle could be applied to the singularity at the center of a black hole. If we view the fundamental particles as objects pulsating in and out of our 4 dimensions, then, instead of the black hole swallowing and condensing matter and energy to a single point in space, we could see the black hole as condensing matter and energy to the point where it is 'switched off', forcing it to disappear from our dimensions in a kind of reverse big bang.
The same principle could be applied to the singularity at the center of a black hole. If we view the fundamental particles as objects pulsating in and out of our 4 dimensions, then, instead of the black hole swallowing and condensing matter and energy to a single point in space, we could see the black hole as condensing matter and energy to the point where it is 'switched off', forcing it to disappear from our dimensions in a kind of reverse big bang.
The fourth reason that when a spin ½ particle rotates by 360 degrees it is then said to be in minus its original state and needs to be rotated a further 360 degrees to return it to its original state. If the elementary particles were pulsating this strange symmetry could be explained if a spin ½ particle completed a full pulsation during a 720 degree rotation. Lets say it starts the rotation in the 'ON' Position ( + energy), then, as it reaches a 360 degree turn it switches to the 'OFF' position ( - energy). It is now in minus the state it was at the start of the rotation. Then, as it begins to rotate a further 360 degrees, it switches back 'ON' again ( + energy), returning it to its original state. This would give us a common sense explanation for the apparent strange symmetry of spin ½ particles.
The fifth reason is wave/particle duality. I have been thinking along the lines of a particle creating a wave through the surrounding space as it pulsates. The wave appearing in the form of virtual particles from the vacuum. Also a pulsating photon would give us a direct explanation of the relationship between a photons energy and its frequency.
The fifth reason is wave/particle duality. I have been thinking along the lines of a particle creating a wave through the surrounding space as it pulsates. The wave appearing in the form of virtual particles from the vacuum. Also a pulsating photon would give us a direct explanation of the relationship between a photons energy and its frequency.
I have attempted to elaborate on the basic idea of pulsating particles by constructing a 'hand waving' model which I will begin to describe now. But, don't expect to find too much here. It is just an extremely rudimentary model that requires a more detailed description But, whilst the detail, or lack thereof, may leave something to be desired, I can't help but feel that the basic principle of pulsating particles could bear some fruit.
The model
The electron
Lets begin with a description of a single electron and work on the assumption that it is surrounded by virtual electron/positron pairs (EPP's). ( Because electrons and positrons are always produced in pairs I will proceed to use the abbreviation 'EPP's' for electron positron pairs from here on. I will refer to the actual electron as the 'incident electron' , for the want of a better term.)
Illustration A below shows the various stages of an EPP field around an incident electron pulsating into existence. The first stage shows the incident electron at the center switched on, with the EPPs surrounding it switched off in the sense that their energy resides in dimensions other than that of our own 4 of space/time. As the incident electron begins to pulsate it causes the EPP's surrounding it to pulsate too, which starts a chain reaction of pulsations through the EPP's switching on a positron and an electron in each pair simultaneously so they are always produced in pairs*. The pulse of EPP's spreads outwards from the incident electron in a wave like motion similar to the ripple you would get if you dropped a stone in a pond.
*I did play around with the idea of the electron and positrons switching on and off alternately, but it created too many difficulties in describing the electric field and gravity as we shall see in a short while.
*I did play around with the idea of the electron and positrons switching on and off alternately, but it created too many difficulties in describing the electric field and gravity as we shall see in a short while.
As you can see the EPP's align themselves according to their charge with the positrons pointing inwards towards the incident electron and the electrons pointing outwards, away from the incident electron.* Because the electrons and positrons that make up the EPP's always exist in pairs, the alignment always ends on the negative electric charge of an electron.
* When I say 'aligning themselves' I am obviously assuming this positioning of the particles as existing in the extra dimensions as well as our own 4 dimensions, as if i it is legitimate to visualize positioning and alignment in these dimensions. But, I'm sure you get my point.
* When I say 'aligning themselves' I am obviously assuming this positioning of the particles as existing in the extra dimensions as well as our own 4 dimensions, as if i it is legitimate to visualize positioning and alignment in these dimensions. But, I'm sure you get my point.
Of course, the illustrations should not be taken too literally. There are a few things that I should point out. The particles that are in the off position are shown as black dots,but they would not be observable in our 4 dimensions of space/time at this stage in their pulsation. They would exist only in the dimensions from which they came. So, the spaces which the particles in the off position occupy in the diagram would not actually exist. Therefore, all the particles that are switched on at any one time would all be bunched together. Also, for reasons that will become clear later, I am assuming that there is no such thing as empty space in this model, so I assuming that the EPP's completely surround the incident electron occupying every point in space around it. Therefore, there would be no gaps in between the particles.
This model is based on particles that pulsate, so we have to think of the particles as being capable of expanding and contracting. Therefore it becomes necessary to think of them as extended objects rather than point particles. But, I will have more to say on this towards the end of the discussion.
You will notice that in the illustrations the EPP's are not depicted as being circular, or spherical in shape. Because every point in space has to be filled with particles it becomes necessary to think of the particles as having a bubble, elastic like nature that makes them flexible enough to stretch or become squashed in order to align themselves and fill every gap. This flexibility is also attributed to the idea of expanding and contracting particles.
You will notice that in the illustrations the EPP's are not depicted as being circular, or spherical in shape. Because every point in space has to be filled with particles it becomes necessary to think of the particles as having a bubble, elastic like nature that makes them flexible enough to stretch or become squashed in order to align themselves and fill every gap. This flexibility is also attributed to the idea of expanding and contracting particles.
If we are to think of the particles as being spinning objects, the odd shape that the particles can assume in this model may appear to present a problem. It's hard to imagine how all the particles could all be spinning when their odd shapes would cause them to bump into each other and prevent a smooth rotation. But, as we know, a particles spin is intrinsic and later I will be offering some ideas of what exactly gives a particle its spin.
The energy initially transferred by the incident electron would become more and more spread out as it is transferred to more and more EPP's further out in the field. This would mean that each EPP has less energy the further out in the field we go. Intuitively, I imagine that the more energy each particle within the system possesses, the more it would expand. So, naturally, I would assume that the closer we get to the incident electron, the more expanded the EPP's would become and that further away from the incident electron the EPP's become less expanded. This expansion of the EPP's would determine how densely packed the EPP field would be at a given point. So, closer to the incident electron we get a more densely packed field and I am assuming that this density is what gives us the periphery of an electron orbital that we find in atoms. Although the EPP field would extend beyond this periphery, the EPP's would be of lower energy, less densely packed and therefore harder to detect.*
* Obviously, we do not detect virtual particles directly, only their effects. But, in this model there is nothing to differentiate between virtual particles and 'real' particles because both continuously appearing and disappearing from our 4 dimensions. So, what I am suggesting is that what we detect as an electron is just the overall effect of many virtual particles.
So, in this model, what we perceive as an electron is not just a single particle nor a wave, but a whole system of particles that springs into existence from the central, incident electron which creates a wave of EPP's popping in and out of existence to and from our 4 dimensions. Although this view of the electrons wave nature is different from the conventional view, we do have an electron with a wave nature that makes it a 'spread out' object.
You may have already spotted some potential problems with this picture. The first of which is that we have positrons and electrons being produced together which should annihilate each other. I could argue that they do not because they do not exist for a long enough period to do so. But, my argument is a little more elaborate than that and I want to postpone the discussion on annihilation until I describe the production of photons a little later. So, for now, I would ask you to take a leap of faith and accept the current picture without the EPP's annihilating.
The second potential problem is that the animation shows concentric rows of particles all with the same charge and, although they are contained by particles of opposite charge ahead and behind them you might ask 'Why don't the like charges sitting along side each other repel and pull the whole system apart?'
My answer to this is that,in 3 dimensions, the rows of like charges would actually take the form of spherical layers and each particle would feel the repulsive force from all directions (apart from ahead and behind them) preventing them from going anywhere and breaking up the system. It is the spherical shape that gives the system its stability. Plus, I will be elaborating on the attractive and repulsive forces between charges a little later.
The third, and perhaps the most important potential problem is that the particles that make up these spherical layers would all be of the same energy and therefore, identical, which would seem to violate the exclusion principle and this is problem that I will tackle now before I proceed any further.
Spin and the exclusion principle
The fact that we have whole layers of electron/pairs all switched ON at the same time would appear to violate the exclusion principle if we are to assume that all the particles that make up each layer have the same energy. The principle states that no two identical fermions can exist in the same quantum state within the same system, and in this picture, we have many fermions existing in the same state. To resolve this problem, i want to take a closer look at the exclusion principle, and, in particular, the spin of elementary particles.
There has to be a physical, mechanistic reason why, for example, two identical electrons cannot exist at the same energy level in an atom. The obvious answer is that they are like charges so they would repel each other, but, as we all know, if they have opposite spin states they can, and do, co-exist. So, in order to understand the physical reason for the exclusion principle we really need an adequate physical description of what spin actually is. And this is what i will attempt to do, and in doing so, i will suggest that the presence of these EPP's around the electron gives us the very reason for the existence of the exclusion principle.
If we assume a particles spin to be a description of it's angular momentum, then we know that the spin angular momentum of a spin ½ particle can only take one of two directions, either up or down. But, up or down in relation to what ?
We could assume that it is in relation to another spin ½ particle that it must position itself up or down, but, conventionally speaking, within the atom there is space in between the spin up and the spin down electrons that share an energy level. Conventionally, this space is considered to be filled with an electric field (amongst other fields), but is there any reason to suppose that these fields dictate the up/down positioning of the electrons ?
In the everyday world the angular momentum of a spinning object can take any direction, so why should fundamental particles be restricted by spatial quantization ? If a spin ½ particle is restricted to either spin up or down in relation to something else, then this would suggest that the space surrounding it is aligned in an up/down position.
In this model the incident electron is surrounded by EPP's, so lets assume that in addition to the alignment the EPP's take in terms of there electrical charge, they also align themselves with each other in terms of their spin up/down position.
To do this we have to assume that each electron and positron that make up the EPP's have a 'top' and a 'bottom' so to speak. We can liken this to each particle having a north and south pole similar to that we would find in a dipolar magnetic field. I should emphasize the point that I am describing something similar to a magnetic dipole and not the magnetic field around a charged particle that we are familiar with which extends quite far from the particle itself. What I am visualizing here is each particle possessing a magnetic north and south pole, but with the magnetic 'energy' only existing around its surface and not extending far beyond it. I know this seems highly speculative, but my reasons will become clear in time.
In figure 1a below, we see a positron and an electron both with an N at the top and a S at the bottom indicating their north and south poles. The black arrow through the center of each indicates the direction of the axis of its spin angular momentum.
Note, that although both the positrons and electrons 'north pole' are at the top in the figure, the direction of their angular momentum is in opposition to each other. I am assuming this to be the case because of their opposite electric charge.
In figure 1b we can see an incident electron with two rows of EPPs to the right of it. This illustrates the alignment that I am assuming the EPPs take in the field with their magnetic poles in the same direction, but with the spin of the electrons and positron in opposite directions to each other, alternating from up to down.
Logically, you would think think their alignment should be north to south pole so that they stable magnetically, but the reason I have assumed this alignment will become clearer later when I discuss the production of photons. ( Also this arrangement means the electrons and positrons are aligned spin up, spin down successively throughout the field. Could this explain the apparent superposition of spin up/spin down states we see in relativistic equations ?)
So we have an electron that is made up of an incident electron and a field of EPP's, with their spin direction aligned in successive up/down positions. If we now take a second electron and pair the two together, their EPP fields would come into contact with each other. Because both EPP fields end on a negative electric charge we can assume that they would not sit comfortably together. But, if we also assume that the EPP's from both fields have a tendency to magnetically align with each other, the most comfortable alignment would be north meeting south pole and south pole meeting north and this would position the two incident electrons so that their spin directions would be in opposite directions.
Each particle ( the incident electron and the EPP's) aligns itself with the particles surrounding it and, as far as their spin angular moment is concerned, the alignment can only take one of two directions, either up or down in relation to the particles next to it. If we take two incident electrons and their EPP fields and place them together, we have a logical reason why one must be spin up and the other must be spin down.
In summary, it is the presence of the EPP's and the way in which they align themselves to each other that makes some sense of why the angular momentum of spin ½ particles can only take one of two directions and why it is only possible for two electrons to share the same energy level in an atom if their spins are in opposite directions. Thus, we have a possible mechanistic reason why the exclusion principle exists.
Electric field
Now I will describe how the EPP's set up an electric field between positive and negative electric charges.
Lets take a nucleus of an atom and assume that it is surrounded by a field of EPP's *. But, in this case the alignment of the EPP's is the reverse of that of the electron ( I refer to the electrical charge alignment in this case, not the spin alignment I have just described). So their electron halves are pointing inwards towards the nucleus and the positron halves are pointing outwards, away from the nucleus. We apply the same principles to the nucleus as we did to the incident electron, where the proton within the nucleus pulsates creating a 'wave' of EPP's switching On then OFF again alternately. **
*I haven't actually constructed a model of the nucleus, but I will be discussing it further later on. But, to save any unnecessary complications at this stage, I want to deal with the picture of the nucleus surrounded by EPPs.
**Of course, the pulsation of a proton would be more complicated due to the fact that it is a composite particle of quarks, but i don't want to go into that complexity here, so, for now, I'll ask you to simply consider the proton as a single positively charged particle.
Note that the field of EPP's around the electron always ends with an electron half of the EPP's, therefore always ending on a negative electric charge, and the the field around the nucleus always ends with a positron half, therefore always ending with a positive electric charge. It is the alignment of the EPP's around the incident particles that give them their electric fields. Of course, my view of an electric field is somewhat different to that of the conventional view where the direction of the field moves outwards from the positive charge and inwards towards the negative charge. In this model, the direction of the electric field for both the electron and the proton is from the center of each field moving outwards.
In Figure 2 below we can see how the the fields of the nucleus and the electron meet and align themselves. It is, for the most part, almost identical to the conventional view, except that, in this case, each point in space is filled by an EPP.
Once again, note how some of the particles are stretched out and some are squashed together depicting their assumed elastic qualities. This becomes important in describing how the field pulls the two opposite charges together and produces photons. But, before I can discuss this I need to jump forward a step and explain my ideas on space, gravity and mass which will include some ideas on dark matter and dark energy.
Space
If we jump forward a step, we can imagine an atom that has all it's electron shells filled so it's nucleus is completely surrounded by electrons. Although half of the electrons EPP field (electric field) would be connected to the field of the nucleus and thereby neutralized, the half of the field that points away from the nucleus would continue to extend. We can imagine the fields of all the electrons within the atom combining to form a single field which surrounds the atom as a whole so the atom as a single EPP field extending outwardly from it and ending on a negative charge. Although the field can potentially extend far from the atom, the further away from the atom we get, the more the energy of the field becomes spread out, so the field becomes less dense making it harder to detect. The closer we get to the atom, the more dense the field becomes and what we perceive as the edge or surface of the atom is just the point where the field becomes dense enough for us to easily detect.
We can take this further and imagine that the electrons around a molecule also combine to form a single field. Taking it further still, we can imagine that the fields surrounding all the atoms and molecules that make up planets and stars combine to form a single field around celestial bodies.
So, the fields around all macroscopic object would fill the whole of space and, as I have said previously, within the fields the EPP's occupy each point in space. Therefore each point in the whole of space would be occupied by EPP's.
However, the EPP's also pulsate and therefore pop in and out of existence. When the EPP's are switched on by an incident particle, they create the dimensions of space/time that we observe in the universe. To put it another way, it is the presence of these particles ( when the are in the ON position ) that create distance between objects, I.e length, breadth, width. But, this means that we also have to assume that when they are in their off position and disappear from our 4 dimensions, the space/time which they were responsible for creating disappears with them.
The EPP's ( and the incident particles) do not simply occupy 'space', they are 'space'. In other words, 'space/time' only exists due to the existence of these EPP's when they are in the on position. When they are in the off position, not only does the EPP disappear from our 4 dimensions, but so does the 4 dimensions of 'space/time' that they created.
The EPP's are the constituent particles of space/time and they 'radiate' outwards in the shape of concentric spheres around their incident particles that make up macroscopic objects. It is this radial, spreading out of the EPP fields that give us the impression of a geometrically curved space/time. More interestingly, it is the pulsation of the incident particles that bring the EPP's into existence in our 4 dimensions, therefore, the incident particles are not only creating a curved space/time, they are actually creating space/time itself from the EPP's around them.
This is one of the fundamental ideas about this model. Conventionally, we regard matter and space as being separate things and say that 'matter tells space how to curve . . and space tells matter how to move'. But here, matter and space/time cannot be separated. Matter creates the space around it, because if it wasn't for the presence of matter, I.e the incident particles, the space around it would not exist. In fact, space/time can be seen as just an extension of matter. They are part of the same thing. What we regard as 'matter' can be seen as just denser areas of 'space', and what we regard as 'space' can be seen as just less dense areas of 'matter'. So, the two cannot truly be considered separately.
If we consider the pre-conditions of the big bang and assume that particles existed but in dimensions other than our 4 of space/time and something excited them causing them to pulsate creating our 4 dimensions, we have a possible explanation of how the universe could have sprung into existence from a singularity.
Gravity
The EPP fields surrounding planets, stars and other macroscopic object would all end on a negative charge because the fields originate from incident electrons. Therefore, where two fields meet there would be a repulsive force between the like charges. So, how does gravity come into effect and attract two objects ?
As I have pointed out before, the energy radiating from the incident electrons becomes more spread out the further away from the object that we go. So, the further out in the field we go, the less densely packed the EPP's become. This gives them a looser connection to their field making it easier for them to be displaced from their fields. So, as the two fields come into contact with each other, the like charges from each field feel the repulsive force from each other. Because the EPP's are more loosely connected further out in the field the repulsive force causes them to wiggle around until they break their connection with their field and become displaced.
It is the individual particles of EPP's that repel each other and not the macroscopic objects as a whole. The repulsion between the individual EPP's causes them to break away from their fields and become displaced* which gradually breaks down the fields layer by layer, causing the two macroscopic objects to move closer together.
*The EPPs which are displaced from their fields could either become reattached to another part of the field, or, if they failed to realign themselves elsewhere in the field before they switched off, they could simply remain off and not return to our 4 dimensions.
*The EPPs which are displaced from their fields could either become reattached to another part of the field, or, if they failed to realign themselves elsewhere in the field before they switched off, they could simply remain off and not return to our 4 dimensions.
Figure 3 below shows a macroscopic object and its EPP field within the EPP field of of a planet. We can see that the area of the fields between the planet and the object have become compressed. This compression pushes the like charges closer together causing them to repel each other and become displaced and as a result the object begins to move closer to the surface ( or rather the center) of the planet.
As the the layers of the EPP fields become displaced, the object immediately move into the space vacated by the displaced EPP's. This pushes them together with a certain amount of force, causing the next layer to break down and be displaced too. The closer to the surface of the planet the object gets, the more energy there is in the planets field and so the repulsive force between the like charges would become greater. This would result in more force 'pulling' the object downwards until the object reaches the surface of the planet. I use the word 'pulling', but, of course, the object is in fact free falling towards the center of the planet.
In figure 3 the object falling into this gravitational field has a smaller EPP field than the planet, in the sense that it does not extend as far as the planets field. So, there would be far less EPP's in the objects field to be broken down than in the planets field. But, as the field of the object breaks down further and further, it reaches a point where the EPP's are too densely packed and the repulsive force is not strong enough to free the EPP's from their field. When it reaches this stage, the EPP's in the objects field remain intact, but continue to breakdown the EPP's in the planets field. Until, of course, the EPP's of the planet are too dense to be broken down any further. It is these points of density that we perceive as the surface of the planet and object.
The true surface, or boundary of an object is actually where the EPP field ends, which is as far out in 'space' as it can reach before meeting another EPP field. But, because the EPP's in the outer reaches of the field are less densely packed they are more easily broken down, so we do do not perceive this more subtle edge in the everyday world. The 'edge' that we perceive is simply a denser area of the EPP field.
Thus, gravity is explained by the displacement of EPP's , reducing the amount of space and creating a shorter distance between objects, giving us the impression of gravity as a force of attraction when it is actually a repulsive force that is responsible for it's existence.
But, if gravity works by like charges on the edge of EPP fields repelling each other and all objects possess such an EPP field, why don't all objects collapse towards each other making the universe one huge clump of matter ?
But, if gravity works by like charges on the edge of EPP fields repelling each other and all objects possess such an EPP field, why don't all objects collapse towards each other making the universe one huge clump of matter ?
The answer is that although the negatively charged edges of the fields repel each other, if objects and there fields are given enough room they will sit comfortably along side each other. It is when they are pushed together or when one object enters a stronger field, such as that of a planet, that the repulsive force is felt strongly enough to displace the EPPs and break down the field.
But,the EPP field of an object such as a planet appears to only extend from its surface. But,the strength of a gravitational field depends on the objects gravitational mass and the vast majority of a planets mass is within the planet, not at it's surface. So,I will now proceed to explain my ideas on mass.
But,the EPP field of an object such as a planet appears to only extend from its surface. But,the strength of a gravitational field depends on the objects gravitational mass and the vast majority of a planets mass is within the planet, not at it's surface. So,I will now proceed to explain my ideas on mass.
Mass
If the EPP field surrounding a body such as a planet is responsible for it's gravitational field, then it is logical to assume that the EPP field is also responsible for its gravitational mass.
Generally speaking, the amount of mass an object has will be determined by how much energy it has. So, the more electrons, protons, neutrons an atom possesses the more energy/mass it has. But, in this model, each particle is regarded as an incident particle that possesses a field of EPP's. So, the more incident particles that we have bunched together in an atom, the more EPP fields we would have bunched together and this creates a greater density of EPP's within and around the atom.
Generally speaking, the amount of mass an object has will be determined by how much energy it has. So, the more electrons, protons, neutrons an atom possesses the more energy/mass it has. But, in this model, each particle is regarded as an incident particle that possesses a field of EPP's. So, the more incident particles that we have bunched together in an atom, the more EPP fields we would have bunched together and this creates a greater density of EPP's within and around the atom.
But, the vast majority of a planets atoms and molecules are within the planet, therefore, the EPP fields emanating from them would not reach the planets surface. However, the atoms and molecules within the core of a planet are extremely compact which means that all the matter surrounding the core, all the way up to the planets surface, is also compacted together. All the atoms and molecules at the core would be constantly trying to move around and, given their compact state, they would be constantly bumping into each other and exerting a force on all the matter around them. The atoms and molecules respond to this with an equal and opposite reaction by exerting a force on the rest of the matter around it. All this bumping and jostling makes the atoms and molecules, from the core to the surface, more energetic than they would be in a less compact situation. More energy in an atom means more energy in the incident particles that make up the atom and more energy in the incident particles means more energy in the EPP fields which they generate. So, the more energy there is in the EPP field, the more reactive the electric charges that make up the field would be when they come into contact with like charges. And this makes for a more energetic and reactive gravitational field.
Laws of motion and inertial mass
If the repulsion of the EPP's are the cause of gravity, what happens when we give an object a push in a direction other than that of a gravitational field ?
Newtons law tells us that an object in motion will remain in motion with the same speed and direction unless acted on by another force. If we push an object into a field of EPP's in a direction other than that of the gravitational field it would be bumping into the EPP's. Intuitively, we might guess that this would slow the object down and eventually bring it to a halt. But, as it bumps into the field of EPP's the like charges would be pushed closer together causing them to repel and become displaced. As they are displaced the object would move into the space vacated by the displaced EPP's where it would bump into another layer of EPP's and the action would repeat itself, thus keeping the object moving forward in the same direction and with the same force as the initial push it received. So, rather than impeding the motion of an object, it is the repulsion and displacement of the EPP's that actually allows an object to keep moving.
Newtons law tells us that an object in motion will remain in motion with the same speed and direction unless acted on by another force. If we push an object into a field of EPP's in a direction other than that of the gravitational field it would be bumping into the EPP's. Intuitively, we might guess that this would slow the object down and eventually bring it to a halt. But, as it bumps into the field of EPP's the like charges would be pushed closer together causing them to repel and become displaced. As they are displaced the object would move into the space vacated by the displaced EPP's where it would bump into another layer of EPP's and the action would repeat itself, thus keeping the object moving forward in the same direction and with the same force as the initial push it received. So, rather than impeding the motion of an object, it is the repulsion and displacement of the EPP's that actually allows an object to keep moving.
The principle is much the same as the principle of gravity except for the fact that when moving an object in a direction other than that of a gravitational field it requires a push to get it to react with the EPP field surrounding it.
But, when we accelerate an object by exerting a force on it, we also have to take into account it's inertial mass. Inertial mass is the of the amount of resistance to acceleration that an object has. So, to understand what gives an object it's inertial mass, we need to understand what it is that offers resistance to acceleration.
But, when we accelerate an object by exerting a force on it, we also have to take into account it's inertial mass. Inertial mass is the of the amount of resistance to acceleration that an object has. So, to understand what gives an object it's inertial mass, we need to understand what it is that offers resistance to acceleration.
If I kick a football, it would offer less resistance than if I kicked a canon ball. Obviously, this is because the football is filled with air and has more bounce than the canon ball which is made of solid iron.
If I take two sub atomic particles, a and b, with particle a having more mass than particle b, and give them a push, particle a would offer more resistance than particle b. But, of course, the question is, why should this be the case ?
If I take two sub atomic particles, a and b, with particle a having more mass than particle b, and give them a push, particle a would offer more resistance than particle b. But, of course, the question is, why should this be the case ?
If we consider the particles as incident particles surrounded by EPP fields, the answer becomes clearer. The more energy an incident particles has with each pulsation, the more energy it transfers to the EPP field and the more energy the EPP's have the more they expand with each pulsation making the field more compact.
So, particle b has more bounce than particle a when they are each given a push, giving particle a more resistance than particle b.
It is the density of the EPP fields which determine the amount of resistance an object has to acceleration. So, the inertial mass of an object is determined by the density of it's EPP field.
So, particle b has more bounce than particle a when they are each given a push, giving particle a more resistance than particle b.
It is the density of the EPP fields which determine the amount of resistance an object has to acceleration. So, the inertial mass of an object is determined by the density of it's EPP field.
In summary, an objects inertial mass and gravitational mass (passive and active) are determined by the field of EPP's. The principle of an object being accelerated by a gravitational field and the principle of an objects constant velocity after being given a push are actually the same as each other, thus giving us a reason for the equivalence of gravitational and inertial mass.
Dark matter and dark energy
If the universe were filled with EPP's springing into existence in our four dimensions of space/time, this could account for the Dark mass and dark energy problem. Although the EPP's have no mass themselves, they are directly responsible for the mass and gravitational fields of all the matter in the universe. It is possible that the EPP fields could account for the missing mass of the universe. But, can it account for dark energy too ?
The fields of EPP's surrounding each galaxy would extend as far as they could until they met with the fields of any surrounding galaxies. We are obviously talking about vast distances here and, as i have suggested earlier, the further out in the field of EPP's we go, the less densely packed they become and the weaker the energy they possess. Also, bear in mind that the galaxies are in constant motion, so their fields would be in constant motion too.
The fields of EPP's surrounding each galaxy would extend as far as they could until they met with the fields of any surrounding galaxies. We are obviously talking about vast distances here and, as i have suggested earlier, the further out in the field of EPP's we go, the less densely packed they become and the weaker the energy they possess. Also, bear in mind that the galaxies are in constant motion, so their fields would be in constant motion too.
Where two of these intergalactic fields meet, contact between them would be slight, in the sense that they would not be so closely pushed together. This would make it far less likely that the EPP's would repel each other and break away from their field, thus the galaxies would not move closer together (Gravity). However, there would undoubtedly be some repulsion trying to push the fields apart, even if that repulsion was weak, and the fact that the galaxies are in constant motion would allow for the possibility of gaps opening up between the fields.
But, as I have said previously, in this model their is no such thing as a vacuum, as the presence of the EPP's are responsible for the very existence of 'space'. Therefore, we cannot allow for any empty gaps or voids to open up between the galaxies. If two EPP fields were to begin to pull apart in a more densely packed area of 'space', i.e, an area where there were more EPP's around them, it would be easy to imagine EPP's from the surrounding areas moving in and filling the gaps as they begin to open, in much the same way as particles of air fill a potential vacuum in our atmosphere. So, what would fill the gaps deep in 'space' as they began to open ?
But, as I have said previously, in this model their is no such thing as a vacuum, as the presence of the EPP's are responsible for the very existence of 'space'. Therefore, we cannot allow for any empty gaps or voids to open up between the galaxies. If two EPP fields were to begin to pull apart in a more densely packed area of 'space', i.e, an area where there were more EPP's around them, it would be easy to imagine EPP's from the surrounding areas moving in and filling the gaps as they begin to open, in much the same way as particles of air fill a potential vacuum in our atmosphere. So, what would fill the gaps deep in 'space' as they began to open ?
Our physical dimensions of 'Space' only exist due to the EPP's switching on creating the concept of length, depth and breadth. There is no reason to assume that there are a limited number of these EPP's in the off position or that they are geographically located anywhere in particular in our universe. So, if a gap were to begin to open up between two fields, it is possible that more EPP's switch on and appear in our 4 dimensions to fill any gaps.
As two galaxies move away from each other, the EPP fields between them would become stretched and eventually pull apart creating a gap between the fields. As soon as this happens, more EPPs are created to immediately fill the gap until they too become stretched and pull apart, thus making way for even more EPPs to come into existence.
As two galaxies move away from each other, the EPP fields between them would become stretched and eventually pull apart creating a gap between the fields. As soon as this happens, more EPPs are created to immediately fill the gap until they too become stretched and pull apart, thus making way for even more EPPs to come into existence.
This would gradually create a greater distance between the two galaxies by literally creating more 'space' between them. As more are created, they would continue to cause the galaxies to pull apart leaving the way for even more EPP's to come into existence and thus we get an expansion of 'space'. It is not simply a matter of 'space' stretching out, it is a matter of literally more 'space' being created.
Photons
Now that we have a picture of space and mass I can return to the electric field between a nucleus and an electron which I began to describe earlier and explain how photons are produced.
You will recall how I described each incident particle and each electron and positron in the EPP field has having a magnetic north and south pole and it's surface being surrounded by an intrinsic magnetic energy and that the magnetic north and south poles of each particle would be aligned in the same direction within an EPP field. This would mean that the EPP field as a whole would have a particular magnetic direction, from north to south. So when the field of a nucleus and the field of an incident electron meet, we could imagine them turning to align themselves magnetically with north to south pole meeting and the magnetic energy in opposite directions, as shown in figure 4 below. So, opposite charges meet at the edge of the fields creating an electrical bond, but also, they are aligned magnetically giving the formation a greater stability.
You will recall how I described each incident particle and each electron and positron in the EPP field has having a magnetic north and south pole and it's surface being surrounded by an intrinsic magnetic energy and that the magnetic north and south poles of each particle would be aligned in the same direction within an EPP field. This would mean that the EPP field as a whole would have a particular magnetic direction, from north to south. So when the field of a nucleus and the field of an incident electron meet, we could imagine them turning to align themselves magnetically with north to south pole meeting and the magnetic energy in opposite directions, as shown in figure 4 below. So, opposite charges meet at the edge of the fields creating an electrical bond, but also, they are aligned magnetically giving the formation a greater stability.
If we take another look at the electric field created in figure5 below, we can see that due to the curved perimeters of the fields, an electron from the incident electrons EPP field and a positron from the nucleus' field which meet at the center of the field are pushed closer together than the other particles ( highlighted in the circle).
What I am suggesting is that this electron and positron are pushed so close together that they bond together to form a single particle. The particle they create would be electrically neutral due to the fact that it is made of two particles of opposite and equal charge. Because of their magnetic alignment, the particles would bond with their spin alignment in the same direction, creating a spin 1 particle. Essentially, the particle they form would be a photon.
Aah !, but what about the mass ? I here you cry. Both an electron and a positron have mass, whereas a photon has none. But, as I have already explained, in this model, the EPP field that is created by an incident particle is what creates mass and, as we shall see, the photon does not create an EPP field and therefore has no mass.
Aah !, but what about the mass ? I here you cry. Both an electron and a positron have mass, whereas a photon has none. But, as I have already explained, in this model, the EPP field that is created by an incident particle is what creates mass and, as we shall see, the photon does not create an EPP field and therefore has no mass.
Earlier I have spoke about EPP fields being pushed together in gravitational fields and other forms of acceleration and becoming squashed, so you may be asking ' If pairs of electron and positrons within EPP fields become squashed together in these circumstances, Why does it not create photons?' The answer is that the spin alignment within the fields themselves is spin up/ spin down alternately and an electron and positron can only create a photon if both are aligned in the same spin direction. So, no matter how closely squashed together the EPP's become within a single field they would not create a photon.
But, a photon carries away energy from an atom and a single electron and a single positron from the outskirts of an EPP field would not carry much energy away with it. So lets take a look at what happens next.
But, a photon carries away energy from an atom and a single electron and a single positron from the outskirts of an EPP field would not carry much energy away with it. So lets take a look at what happens next.
The intrinsic spin angular momentum of both particles are in the same direction, so, when the two particles combine, we can imagine they both begin to rotate about a central axis.
Although the photon is electrically neutral, it is constructed of two charged particles and so, Some of the EPP's around each half of the photon become electrically aligned to each half. So, as the photon begins to rotate it drags these aligned EPP's with them as depicted in Illustration B1 below. The EPP's which were not aligned to the halves of the photon get knocked out of position by the rotating photon and EPP's and turn to align themselves with towards the photon halves.
Although the photon is electrically neutral, it is constructed of two charged particles and so, Some of the EPP's around each half of the photon become electrically aligned to each half. So, as the photon begins to rotate it drags these aligned EPP's with them as depicted in Illustration B1 below. The EPP's which were not aligned to the halves of the photon get knocked out of position by the rotating photon and EPP's and turn to align themselves with towards the photon halves.
So, what we have at this stage is a rotating photon dragging an electric field of two halves around with it. But, the direction of the pulsation of the electric field has now changed. Because the EPP's have aligned with the two halves of the photon, the direction the energy flows is now towards the photon and converges at the the center.
So, as the EPP's at the outer edge of the new field pulsate, they transfer their energy to the next inner row of EPP's. But, because they are being dragged around by the central photon, they are no longer connected to their original field of their incident particle. Therefore, as they transfer their energy to the next row and die back down to the off position, there is no row of EPP's behind them to switch them back on again. So, when they switch off, they stay, as is shown in Illustration B2 below. This process continues with each successive row passing on its energy to the next and switching off. This means that the field between the electron and nucleus gradually disappears bringing the electron and nucleus closer together.
So, as the EPP's at the outer edge of the new field pulsate, they transfer their energy to the next inner row of EPP's. But, because they are being dragged around by the central photon, they are no longer connected to their original field of their incident particle. Therefore, as they transfer their energy to the next row and die back down to the off position, there is no row of EPP's behind them to switch them back on again. So, when they switch off, they stay, as is shown in Illustration B2 below. This process continues with each successive row passing on its energy to the next and switching off. This means that the field between the electron and nucleus gradually disappears bringing the electron and nucleus closer together.
Although the EPPs in the field around the photon are switching off and disappearing, the photon itself continues to pulsate with both the electron and positron halves switching off then on again simultaneously. This because the energy from each half of the photon is moving in opposite directions, so when the energy from the electron half dies down it moves to the positron half switching the positron back on again. At the same time, when the energy from the positron half dies down it move to the electron half switching the electron back on again. So the energy continues to move back and forth from one particle to the other keeping the photon pulsating.
But, of course, during this process, all the energy that has been transferred from the EPP's is converging on the central photon which absorbs all the energy from the field which it created, as shown in Illustration B3 below.
But, of course, during this process, all the energy that has been transferred from the EPP's is converging on the central photon which absorbs all the energy from the field which it created, as shown in Illustration B3 below.
As the field which the photon created disappears and the EPP fields of the electron and nucleus move closer together, they push on the photon between them in all directions and this pressure squeezes the photon out of the atom so it can begin its journey through space.
By absorbing energy from the field and leaving the atom, the photon has left the incident electron in a lower energy state closer to the nucleus ( actually the atom as a whole is in a lower energy state). The energy of the photon would be determined by where in the EPP field it was created. If it is formed in the outer part of an EPP field, further away from the incident particles, it would have a lower energy due to the fact that the EPPs would have a lower energy in this part of the field. If it is formed in an area of the field closer to the incident particles it would have a higher energy, having absorbed energy from higher energy EPPs. Later I will describe how the photon becomes absorbed into another atom and redistributes its energy, pushing the electron further away from the nucleus and giving the atom more energy.
By absorbing energy from the field and leaving the atom, the photon has left the incident electron in a lower energy state closer to the nucleus ( actually the atom as a whole is in a lower energy state). The energy of the photon would be determined by where in the EPP field it was created. If it is formed in the outer part of an EPP field, further away from the incident particles, it would have a lower energy due to the fact that the EPPs would have a lower energy in this part of the field. If it is formed in an area of the field closer to the incident particles it would have a higher energy, having absorbed energy from higher energy EPPs. Later I will describe how the photon becomes absorbed into another atom and redistributes its energy, pushing the electron further away from the nucleus and giving the atom more energy.
Right now you may be thinking ' If this is how photons are formed, then why isn't the whole electric field between an electron and a nucleus swallowed up by photons leaving the incident electron sitting right next to a proton ? Moreover, why doesn't the incident electron itself get swallowed up by a photon ?
Well, firstly, the photon would only be able to drag a certain number of EPPs around with it as it rotates, so it would only absorb part of the EPP field. Also I am assuming that the EPP fields are only broken down until they get to a level of density where they cannot be broken down any further and this would be lowest energy level of the atom. What would happen at this stage is that the EPP field would connect and the electron and positron which are squashed together and would usually form the photon would bond together, but would find themselves in such a tightly packed field that they would not have enough room to rotate and begin the process of absorbing the field, so they would stay where they are bonding the field of the incident electron to the field of the nucleus.
Well, firstly, the photon would only be able to drag a certain number of EPPs around with it as it rotates, so it would only absorb part of the EPP field. Also I am assuming that the EPP fields are only broken down until they get to a level of density where they cannot be broken down any further and this would be lowest energy level of the atom. What would happen at this stage is that the EPP field would connect and the electron and positron which are squashed together and would usually form the photon would bond together, but would find themselves in such a tightly packed field that they would not have enough room to rotate and begin the process of absorbing the field, so they would stay where they are bonding the field of the incident electron to the field of the nucleus.
But, what about the electrons that come to rest further out in an atom with a higher atomic number ? If the inner shells were filled by electrons, the fields of the outer electron would not break down to a point of high density closer to the nucleus and yet they would still come to rest in the outer energy levels.
This is explained by the idea that the EPPs can stretch. In Figure 6 we can see two electrons that have come to rest around the nucleus and a third electron which has come to rest at a higher energy level. ( I am aware that this is not an accurate depiction of an atom, I have not taken into account the shape of electron orbitals here. This is purely to demonstrate the point as simply as possible).
This is explained by the idea that the EPPs can stretch. In Figure 6 we can see two electrons that have come to rest around the nucleus and a third electron which has come to rest at a higher energy level. ( I am aware that this is not an accurate depiction of an atom, I have not taken into account the shape of electron orbitals here. This is purely to demonstrate the point as simply as possible).
The electron at the higher energy level cannot get any closer to the nucleus because its path is blocked by the two electrons in the lower energy levels. The field in between the higher energy electron and the nucleus has become stretched out because the field has already broken down as much as it possibly can without breaking the connection between particles. So, where the the field of the incident electron and the nucleus meet, the electrons and positrons of the field connect due to their opposite charge, but cannot get close enough together to form a bond and start the process of forming a photon.
Before I proceed to explain how the photon moves through space, let me just say a few words about annihilation.
Before I proceed to explain how the photon moves through space, let me just say a few words about annihilation.
As we know, conventionally speaking, under certain circumstances the energy of a photon or other disturbances of the 'vacuum' can produce electron positron pairs. However, these are so called 'real' electrons and positrons ('real' as opposed to virtual). So when these pairs are created, in this model they would each form a field of EPP's. When their fields come into contact with each other they would break down in the same process as described above, creating photons from the field and one from the incident electron and positron themselves.
So, after the photon has been released from the atom, it then has to move through space. But, in this model, space is constructed of EPPs so there is no empty space for the photon to move through. So, how does it make its way through the EPP fields ?
So, after the photon has been released from the atom, it then has to move through space. But, in this model, space is constructed of EPPs so there is no empty space for the photon to move through. So, how does it make its way through the EPP fields ?
The important thing to bear in mind is that the photon pulsates, appearing then disappearing from our 4 dimensions. Illustration C below shows the effect this pulsation has on the surrounding EPPs.
Note that the EPPs are arranged as if forming a flat space. This is just for my convenience because the shape of space is not important here. Also, the photon is much larger than the EPPs. I am assuming this to be the case because the photon has absorbed energy from many EPPs from within the atom when it was formed. Once again, it is necessary to assume that the particles concerned are extended objects and that they have an elastic quality.
Because of the photons shape, as the photon switches on and expands,the EPPs above and below it in the animation are compressed the EPPs to the left and right of the photon become stretched out.
Because of the photons shape, as the photon switches on and expands,the EPPs above and below it in the animation are compressed the EPPs to the left and right of the photon become stretched out.
Taking into account that I am assuming the particles to have an elastic quality and that every point in space is filled by EPPs, it is reasonable to assume that there would be some restoring force pushing back on the photon as it expands. The bulk of the restoring force would come from the EPPs at the top and bottom of the photon because this is where the greater compression is occurring. As the restoring forces push back, they squeeze the photon and force it to move out of its location.
As the photon moves to another location, it compresses more EPPs in that location which again push back forcing it to continue moving and the process repeats itself keeping the photon moving along in a straight line. The whole process is similar to a peristaltic pump action except that the pump action itself is initiated by the pulsation of the object being that is being pumped.
As the photon moves to another location, it compresses more EPPs in that location which again push back forcing it to continue moving and the process repeats itself keeping the photon moving along in a straight line. The whole process is similar to a peristaltic pump action except that the pump action itself is initiated by the pulsation of the object being that is being pumped.
The compression and restoring force of the EPPs would, of course, create a wave around the photon as it moves through them. But this would obviously be a longitudinal wave, not a transverse wave usually associated with electromagnetic radiation. However, in this model,it is the photon that carries EM radiation and the wave associated with it moves perpendicular to the direction of the photon.
The wave itself would spread out from the photon, but the main force of the wave is initiated where the expansion of the photon causes the greatest compression. This is at the top and bottom of the photon in the animation. The difference between this wave and a transverse wave is that the displacement in a transverse wave is in one direction, followed by displacement in the opposite direction. But, here we have displacement in both directions at the same time. The conventional wave equations for EM radiation could easily be reinterpreted by taking the conventional solutions associated with the magnetic field and the electric field and instead of viewing them as being at a 90 degree angle to each other, we view then as being at an angle of 180 degrees to each other. But of course here I am describing the displacement of EPPs, not an electric and magnetic field.
The wave length is determined by the pulsation of the photon. The photon expands and moves through the EPPs creating a wave, then dies back down again and this would create one wavelength. The more energy the photon has the faster it pulsates, thereby creating a shorter wavelength and this gives us a clear relation between a photons energy and its frequency, with the frequency being the frequency of its pulsation.
The photon moves due to the compression and restoring forces of the EPP field so, the speed at which the photon moves is determined by the rate at which the EPPs could be displaced. In what is conventionally regarded as a vacuum, but in this model is the outer reaches of the EPP fields, the speed is the speed of light because this is the maximum rate of displacement, in the same way that the speed of sound is the maximum rate of displacement in air molecules. In a denser medium, which in this model is a denser EPP field, the rate of displacement is slowed down and so the speed of the photon is slowed down. However, it would continue to pulsate at the same frequency and this would give rise to a shorter wavelength.
The photon moves due to the compression and restoring forces of the EPP field so, the speed at which the photon moves is determined by the rate at which the EPPs could be displaced. In what is conventionally regarded as a vacuum, but in this model is the outer reaches of the EPP fields, the speed is the speed of light because this is the maximum rate of displacement, in the same way that the speed of sound is the maximum rate of displacement in air molecules. In a denser medium, which in this model is a denser EPP field, the rate of displacement is slowed down and so the speed of the photon is slowed down. However, it would continue to pulsate at the same frequency and this would give rise to a shorter wavelength.
Reflection, refraction and diffraction
Reflection of light in this model is explained as, when the photon encounters a medium that is too dense for it to penetrate (a dense medium in this model is a dense field of EPPs), it simply bounces off and continues its journey.
The explanation of refraction is pretty much the same as the conventional explanation. When a photon encounters a denser medium at an angle, half of its wave enters the dense medium before the other half and slows it down. This results in one half of the photon being slowed down too, while the other half is still moving at the faster speed which leads to the photon and its wave changing direction.
The explanation of refraction is pretty much the same as the conventional explanation. When a photon encounters a denser medium at an angle, half of its wave enters the dense medium before the other half and slows it down. This results in one half of the photon being slowed down too, while the other half is still moving at the faster speed which leads to the photon and its wave changing direction.
The mechanism used to explain diffraction is pretty much the same as refraction. If the photon moves more or less through center of two closely spaced objects it would continue in a straight line. But, it if was slightly off center, the half of the wave closest to the object at the side of the gap would be slowed down causing the photon to change its direction slightly.
Photon absorption
When a photon moves in to the EPP field of an atom, whether it is absorbed or not and where in the atom ( I.e which energy level) it is absorbed would obviously depend on how much energy the photon has. If it has high energy and moves through a lower energy area of the atom, it would just pass straight through. If the photon has low energy and moves into a higher energy area of the atom, it would just bounce off ( reflection). However, if it entered an area of the atom that equaled its energy, it would neither be reflected nor would it pass straight through. Instead it would be brought to halt by the EPPs and become trapped. At this stage the EPPs surrounding the photon would become compressed, but instead of pushing back on the photon and ejecting it from the atom, the push back pulls the electron and nucleus further apart. But, we can allow no gaps of empty space in this model, so, as the electron and nucleus begin to pull apart, the photon begins to give up it s energy by creating more EPPs around it, filling potential gaps before they are created. It stops when all the energy it absorbed in its creation is surrendered to the field of the atom and the new EPPs it created realign them selves with the fields of the nucleus and the electron. It is the exact reverse process of a photon being created. Putting more energy into the EPP field and pushing the electron back to a higher energy level.
Doppler effect
Conventionally, the Doppler effect of light is explained in terms of an apparent shift in the frequency of waves radiating from a source that is either moving towards or away from the observer. But, in this model, light ( and all other EM radiation ) is explained in terms of photons and the photons are the source of the waves, and the frequency of the waves is dependent on the pulsation of the photons. So, if an object, such as a star for instance, were traveling away from a stationary observer and emitting these photons, you would think there should be no Doppler effect observed because the frequency of the pulsation of the photon would not be effected or dependent on whether it's source was in motion or not.
However, we also need to consider the medium through which the photon is moving. In this model it is the EPP's that make up 'space'. If one object is moving away from another object there is an increase in 'space' between them. But, as i have already said, there can be no empty 'space' in this model. So, as the two object pull apart the EPP fields that exist between the two objects would become stretched out which means that the EPP's themselves would become stretched. As one object continues to move away from the other object the fields would reach a point where they must pull apart. Any gap that begins to form between them would then be filled by other EPP's ( either flowing in from other areas of 'space' around them or being created from the 'vacuum' as i explained earlier in the discussion on dark energy ). These additional EPP's would then also become stretched until they too begin to pull apart, and so on. So the object moving away from the stationary source is continuously stretching out the space in between them.
Because the photon is being squeezed through the EPPs, when it travels through the stretched EPP's the photon would also become stretched and so, to a stationary observer, the frequency of the displacement of the EPP's caused by the photons pulsation would also appear to be stretched out, giving the observer the impression of a redshift in the same way that we observe a redshift from the light emitted by distant galaxies that has traveled over a stretched out 'space'.
Conversely, if a light emitting object were traveling towards a stationary observer, the EPP fields between them and the photon itself would become squashed and contracted. This gives the stationary observer the impression of a higher frequency, thus blue shifting the light observed.
Conversely, if a light emitting object were traveling towards a stationary observer, the EPP fields between them and the photon itself would become squashed and contracted. This gives the stationary observer the impression of a higher frequency, thus blue shifting the light observed.
Invariance of light
It is this stretching and contraction of 'space' that also explains the invariance of the speed of light. Lets take a familiar example of the concept. -- We have two star ships, one stationary, and one in motion moving at half the speed of light. As the the ship in motion passes the stationary ship, both emit a laser beam. After 12 seconds, the first ship records that the light has traveled 12 light seconds in 12 seconds.
Due to time dilation and length contraction, the ship that is in motion records that the light has traveled 9 light seconds in 9 seconds.
The length contraction is explained by the contraction of the length of the ship and all it's measuring equipment on board. However, we also need to consider the contraction of the 'space' it is traveling in.
An object moving through an EPP field would condense the EPPs ahead of it as it pushes into them before forcing them to repel and become displaced. The faster an object is moving, the more it will condense the EPPs, not only in the space that it is moving onto, but also within the object itself. So, as the ship moves forward at half the speed of light, not only does it's own length contract due to the EPPs condensing, but, it also pushes on the EPP's ahead of it squashing them closer together. This contracts the distance ahead of the ship from 12 light seconds to 9 light seconds. So, now the ship is moving through a much denser 'space' than it would be if it were traveling at a slower speed. A denser 'space' would be more difficult to break down because the EPP's are more tightly packed together making more difficult for them to be displaced.
Due to time dilation and length contraction, the ship that is in motion records that the light has traveled 9 light seconds in 9 seconds.
The length contraction is explained by the contraction of the length of the ship and all it's measuring equipment on board. However, we also need to consider the contraction of the 'space' it is traveling in.
An object moving through an EPP field would condense the EPPs ahead of it as it pushes into them before forcing them to repel and become displaced. The faster an object is moving, the more it will condense the EPPs, not only in the space that it is moving onto, but also within the object itself. So, as the ship moves forward at half the speed of light, not only does it's own length contract due to the EPPs condensing, but, it also pushes on the EPP's ahead of it squashing them closer together. This contracts the distance ahead of the ship from 12 light seconds to 9 light seconds. So, now the ship is moving through a much denser 'space' than it would be if it were traveling at a slower speed. A denser 'space' would be more difficult to break down because the EPP's are more tightly packed together making more difficult for them to be displaced.
Breaking through the densely packed EPPs causes the ships speed to slow down, just as the speed of any object would be slowed down moving through a denser medium because more resistance is offered. But, the observers on the ship do not experience the ship slowing down, because their clocks have slowed too.
The slowing of time can also be explained by the increased density of 'space'. A clock, or any instrument for measuring time has moving parts, even if those moving parts are at the sub-atomic level. Anything that moves has to move through 'space' ( in this case the EPP's ) and if that 'space' becomes more dense, things will be forced to moves more slowly through it.
The slowing of time can also be explained by the increased density of 'space'. A clock, or any instrument for measuring time has moving parts, even if those moving parts are at the sub-atomic level. Anything that moves has to move through 'space' ( in this case the EPP's ) and if that 'space' becomes more dense, things will be forced to moves more slowly through it.
In this model, we find the same increase in the density of EPPs the closer we get to the center of a gravitational object. All moving objects in this 'space' has to move through the EPP's in order to move. This explains why time dilation also occurs in a gravitational field. Plus, the denser EPP field we would find closer to the gravitational center of an object which becomes less dense further away from the center, also gives us an explanation for gravitational redshift. The density of the EPP fields gives us one explanation for what is usually considered two similar, but separate phenomena.
Interference
This model provides us with a 'space' that is filled with particles(the EPP's), so, any object that moves through this 'space' would create waves, just as any object moving through any other medium would. And, it is these waves that account for the interference patterns we get in two path experiments, such as the double slit experiment and Mach, Zender interferometers.
As I have already described, the photon creates a wave as it pulsates and squeezes its way through the EPP's. Taking another look at animation 5, we can see that although the waves are predominant at the elongated ends of the photon, they do fan out and almost surround the whole photon. Because the wave is created by the pulsation of the photon we can also see that it is moving just ahead of the photon, although not accelerating away from it of course. Both the photon and the wave are moving at the same speed.
As I have already described, the photon creates a wave as it pulsates and squeezes its way through the EPP's. Taking another look at animation 5, we can see that although the waves are predominant at the elongated ends of the photon, they do fan out and almost surround the whole photon. Because the wave is created by the pulsation of the photon we can also see that it is moving just ahead of the photon, although not accelerating away from it of course. Both the photon and the wave are moving at the same speed.
If we were to pass a single photon through a double slit apparatus, the photon would only travel through one of the slits, but its wave would travel through both. As the photon and the wave emerges on the other side of the slits the waves would interfere with each other. This would deform the EPP field ( the fabric of space) by creating areas of contraction and areas of expansion in the form of an interference pattern.
Because the velocity of the photon is dependent on the EPPs squeezing it along its path, if it found itself in a deformed field its path would be slightly altered. In the case of two path experiments, the alteration in its path would be determined by the interference pattern created. As we pass more and more photons through the experiment, one at a time, we get the gradual build up of an interference pattern on the detector screen.
Because the velocity of the photon is dependent on the EPPs squeezing it along its path, if it found itself in a deformed field its path would be slightly altered. In the case of two path experiments, the alteration in its path would be determined by the interference pattern created. As we pass more and more photons through the experiment, one at a time, we get the gradual build up of an interference pattern on the detector screen.
The same principle applies to an interferometer. The photon itself travels down one path and its wave travels through both, creating interference where the two paths are reconnected.
In the case of an Electron, or any other particle with mass, we already have a field surrounding the incident electron and the pulsation running through that field behaves like a wave. But, i am not suggesting that it is this wave motion that is responsible for the interference.
The incident electron and it's field travel together as a single object. Therefore, the object ( the incident electron and it's field) as a whole would create a wave through the EPP's as it moves through them and so we get exactly the same results of a two path experiment with the electron as we get with a photon.
In the case of an Electron, or any other particle with mass, we already have a field surrounding the incident electron and the pulsation running through that field behaves like a wave. But, i am not suggesting that it is this wave motion that is responsible for the interference.
The incident electron and it's field travel together as a single object. Therefore, the object ( the incident electron and it's field) as a whole would create a wave through the EPP's as it moves through them and so we get exactly the same results of a two path experiment with the electron as we get with a photon.
The nature of opposite charges
Before I proceed to explain my ideas on magnetism, I want to explain my ideas on how opposite and like charges interact with each other. The discussion is, of course, highly speculative and I actually wanted to avoid this kind of speculation altogether, but, as we shall see in the next section on magnetism, it became necessary in order to explain the Lorentz force.
In this model, charges interact by coming into direct contact with each other at the perimeters of the EPP fields, so I began to wonder what makes like charges repel each other and opposite charges tend to stick together ? To answer this question we need to know what the essential difference is between a positive and a negative charge and so I began to speculate about the possible structure of electrons and positrons. This is what I came up with.
In this model, charges interact by coming into direct contact with each other at the perimeters of the EPP fields, so I began to wonder what makes like charges repel each other and opposite charges tend to stick together ? To answer this question we need to know what the essential difference is between a positive and a negative charge and so I began to speculate about the possible structure of electrons and positrons. This is what I came up with.
Positive and negative charges tend to move in opposite directions to each other when subjected to an external magnetic or electric field. Yet, positrons and electrons, for example, are essentially identical except for their opposite charge. So, I began thinking that maybe electrons and positrons ( and, perhaps, all particles ) are made of the same 'stuff', but, there was some intrinsic, directional aspect to each particle, with a positive charge being in one direction and a negative charge being in the opposite direction. Their spin direction and magnetic poles proved to be inadequate in providing an explanation for their observed behaviour. So, I elaborated on this by imagining that each particle took the form of a helix with, say, a positive charge possessing a left hand helix and a negative charge with a right hand helix.
To describe this in more detail, lets say we take a one dimensional line of energy, something similar to a string in string theory, but not quite the same. I am not imagining this string vibrating creating a wave along it. Instead, lets imagine that this 'string' is a line of energy flowing in a particular direction. Before I go any further, lets lay down a couple of ground rules regarding these lines of energy.
If we were to take two lines of energy and place them parallel to each other with their energy flowing in the same direction, we can say that because the energy of both lines are moving the same direction, the flow of energy will tend to reinforce each other and make them resistant to being pushed too close together.
If we were to take two lines of energy and place them parallel to each other with their energy flowing in the same direction, we can say that because the energy of both lines are moving the same direction, the flow of energy will tend to reinforce each other and make them resistant to being pushed too close together.
If, however, we place two lines of energy parallel to each other with their energy moving in opposite directions, we can say that the opposite directions of the energy will cause some resistance and the two lines would tend to stick together.
Now, lets take two of these lines of energy and curl each of them into a helix, but one with a left hand thread and one with a right hand thread. Just to make the picture neat and tidy, we could take the two loose ends of each helix and thread them through the center of the helix and connect them together. This gives us a continuous circuit around which the energy can flow. We now have a basic, hypothetical structure for both a positron and an electron as we can see below in figure 7. Both are made of the same 'stuff', but they are structurally the mirror image of each other.
Now, lets take two of these lines of energy and curl each of them into a helix, but one with a left hand thread and one with a right hand thread. Just to make the picture neat and tidy, we could take the two loose ends of each helix and thread them through the center of the helix and connect them together. This gives us a continuous circuit around which the energy can flow. We now have a basic, hypothetical structure for both a positron and an electron as we can see below in figure 7. Both are made of the same 'stuff', but they are structurally the mirror image of each other.
We can see in figure 7 that the overall flow of energy around the helices in both the positron and the electron is in a downward direction. This downward direction is not to be confused with the particles spin direction, because they are actually spinning in opposite directions to each other. I say that they are spinning, but what I am actually referring to is the direction of the flow of energy. I am not visualizing the particle as whole spinning around an axis, but rather the energy moving in a helical motion around the particle and it is this which determines the particles spin direction.
But, the picture we have at the moment is not complete. We have a structure that gives each particle its spin and its charge, but what we don't have is an explanation for its magnetic energy which I have been referring to throughout this discussion.
But, the picture we have at the moment is not complete. We have a structure that gives each particle its spin and its charge, but what we don't have is an explanation for its magnetic energy which I have been referring to throughout this discussion.
I could just add magnetic energy to the particle ad Hoc, but, I got to thinking what if magnetic energy is not something separate from the energy I have already described, but the same energy rearranged to behave as in accordance to what is observed as magnetic energy.
Lets go back to our lines of energy, only this time we take two longer lines of energy and curl each one into a longer helix than we had before, then curl each helix into another helix to create two particles as shown in figure 8 below.
Lets go back to our lines of energy, only this time we take two longer lines of energy and curl each one into a longer helix than we had before, then curl each helix into another helix to create two particles as shown in figure 8 below.
What we have now is two particles that are almost the same as the previous description, both with an outer helix in which the direction of the energy is spiraling around the particles, but they also both have an inner helix with the additional direction of the energy moving from the top of the particle to the bottom. The outer helix gives each particle its electric charge and spin characteristics, while the inner helix gives each particle its magnetic characteristics. The direction of the magnetic characteristics gives us the impression that the particles have a magnetic north and south pole.
Earlier I compared the line of energy described here with the strings of string theories. There are some other comparisons to be made. String theories suggest that there should be hidden, curled up, dimensions. Here we have a one dimensional line of energy which is curled into a helix, then curled into another helix. Of course we don't have enough curled up dimensions in this picture to account for 10, 11 or more dimensions required by string theory, but, is it possible that these helices account for some of the curled up dimensions ?
Earlier I compared the line of energy described here with the strings of string theories. There are some other comparisons to be made. String theories suggest that there should be hidden, curled up, dimensions. Here we have a one dimensional line of energy which is curled into a helix, then curled into another helix. Of course we don't have enough curled up dimensions in this picture to account for 10, 11 or more dimensions required by string theory, but, is it possible that these helices account for some of the curled up dimensions ?
This was just an after thought really, but, in this model the elementary particles expand from other dimensions and then contract back into them again. A particle constructed of helices curled into helices intuitively portrays a picture of a particle capable of expansion and contraction, so the idea does seem appealing and I thought it was worth a mention.
So, now we have a basic, hypothetical structure of electrons and positrons, lets take a look at how they would interact, starting with two like charges.
So, now we have a basic, hypothetical structure of electrons and positrons, lets take a look at how they would interact, starting with two like charges.
Figure 9 below shows two electrons side by side. In both particles the magnetic direction ( that is, the direction of energy in the inner helix) is the same, which means they would resist being pushed close together. But, both have their spins in the same direction, so, at the point where they would make contact they would be rotating in opposite directions. Their magnetic direction prevents them from sticking together, so their spin directions would cause them to orbit around each other which would pull each particle out of its place in an EPP field.
In figure 10 below, we again have two electrons, only this time one is turned upside down meaning that one is spin up and the other is spin down.
Their magnetic direction opposes each other which means at the point where they contact each other, they would tend to stick together magnetically. However, because the two electrons are spinning in opposite directions, they would be moving in the same direction at the point where they contact each other and this would reinforce their spinning motion.
But, we also need to consider the fact that their helices are both right hand threads. So, at the point where they touch, although they would stick together magnetically, we have two right hand threaded helices contacting each other and turning in opposite directions. The effect of this would be similar to that of turning a right hand threaded bolt in one direction into a right hand threaded nut that is turning in the opposite direction which, of course, converts the turning motion into a linear motion moving the bolt downwards and the nut upwards (or vice versa). So, one particle would move up and the other would move down, pulling the pair apart and displacing them from their fields.
But, we also need to consider the fact that their helices are both right hand threads. So, at the point where they touch, although they would stick together magnetically, we have two right hand threaded helices contacting each other and turning in opposite directions. The effect of this would be similar to that of turning a right hand threaded bolt in one direction into a right hand threaded nut that is turning in the opposite direction which, of course, converts the turning motion into a linear motion moving the bolt downwards and the nut upwards (or vice versa). So, one particle would move up and the other would move down, pulling the pair apart and displacing them from their fields.
So, two electrons coming into contact with each other will always repel each other regardless of their relative spin directions. But, in the electron orbital of an atom, two electrons do exist side by side but only if they have opposite spin directions. So, if electrons always repel each other, why should nature favour a spin up/ spin down formation within the atom ?
The incident electrons would be bonded to the nucleus of an atom by their EPP fields. If two electrons with same spin direction were to share an orbital, they would try to orbit around each other due to the fact that electrons with the same spin direction at the perimeter of their fields would be contacting each other. The attempt to orbit each other would fling on of the incident electrons and its field outwardly away from the nucleus of the atom causing it to break its bond with the nucleus. Thus making this formation unstable.
The incident electrons would be bonded to the nucleus of an atom by their EPP fields. If two electrons with same spin direction were to share an orbital, they would try to orbit around each other due to the fact that electrons with the same spin direction at the perimeter of their fields would be contacting each other. The attempt to orbit each other would fling on of the incident electrons and its field outwardly away from the nucleus of the atom causing it to break its bond with the nucleus. Thus making this formation unstable.
However, if two incident electrons and their fields with opposite spin directions were to share an orbital, they would attempt to move away from each other by one moving upwards and the other moving downwards. So, although the formation would not be a comfortable one, the attempt at up/down motion would allow both to maintain their bond with the nucleus, preventing either from being flung out of the atom.
In figure 11 below, we have an electron and a positron with opposite spin directions.
In figure 11 below, we have an electron and a positron with opposite spin directions.
Their magnetic direction is the same as each other, so they would tend to resist being pushed too close together. Also, because their spin directions oppose each other, at the point where they touch they would be moving in the same direction which means they would not stick together. However, because their spin would be in the same direction at the point where they make contact, this would reinforce their spinning motion enabling them to maintain a stable position. So, although there is no bond between the two as would expect from two opposite charges, they do sit comfortably along side each other enabling them to maintain their positions in their fields. This is why I suggested that electrons and positrons align spin up/spin down alternately in the EPP fields.
Figure 12 below shows an electron and a positron with their spins in the same direction as each other.
Figure 12 below shows an electron and a positron with their spins in the same direction as each other.
At the point where they touch they are spinning in opposite directions. Their magnetic directions are also opposite to each other. This means that in directions the two particles would tend to stick together. Their helices are in opposite directions too, so there is no conversion to linear motion where on moves up and the other down as is the case for two like charges with opposite spin directions. So, the particles are not only able to maintain their positions in the field, but also create a strong bond with each other.
It is this alignment of electrons and positrons with the same spin directions that occurs when the field of a positive charged incident particle meets with the field of a negative charged incident particle. So the bond between the individual electrons and positron at the perimeter of the two fields keeps the two fields held together.
It is this alignment of electrons and positrons with the same spin directions that occurs when the field of a positive charged incident particle meets with the field of a negative charged incident particle. So the bond between the individual electrons and positron at the perimeter of the two fields keeps the two fields held together.
But, if an electron and positron with the same spin direction are pushed close together, as is the case in the formation of a photon, their spin directions at the point where they touch would oppose each other and create friction between them. At this point, their angular momentum would be transferred to rotating the two particles as a whole and this is what begins the process of photon creation which I described earlier.
Magnetism
Lets work on the assumption that all charged particles are constructed as described above, giving them the characteristics of a magnetic direction which we interpret as the particles having a magnetic north and south pole. But, this view means that the magnetism only exists only around the periphery of the particle, so, what we now need is a description of the magnetic field that we are familiar with which extends further out from a charged particle.
You will recall that the EPPs which make up the field of an incident particle are aligned spin up/ spin down alternately meaning that the magnetic direction of each particle are all aligned in the same direction. This is illustrated in Figure 13 below and we can see that this alignment gives us an approximation of the magnetic field that we are familiar with ( Only the general, magnetic direction of the particles is depicted here and not the particles themselves).
You will recall that the EPPs which make up the field of an incident particle are aligned spin up/ spin down alternately meaning that the magnetic direction of each particle are all aligned in the same direction. This is illustrated in Figure 13 below and we can see that this alignment gives us an approximation of the magnetic field that we are familiar with ( Only the general, magnetic direction of the particles is depicted here and not the particles themselves).
The magnetic direction of all the particles creates a north to south direction of magnetism throughout the field, but, obviously, this is not the conventional view of a magnetic field created by a single spinning charge, so we can do away with the problem of a charge spinning 'impossibly fast' to create the field.
You are probably expecting me to explain the ferromagnetic materials by suggesting that the unpaired electrons magnetic poles align north to south creating an overall magnetic field throughout the material. But, although I did entertain this idea for a while, I just couldn't find a mechanism that would allow for like poles to repel each other and for opposite pole to attract, so I came up with a different explanation instead.
Lets assume that a free charged incident particle and its field are rotating as a whole. This is because the spin of the incident particle would drag the EPPs surrounding it in a circular motion and those EPPs drag the next layer and so on. So the incident particle and its field are rotating around the magnetic polar axis of the whole field. As this discussion progresses, we shall see that the spinning EPP fields are responsible for the circular magnetic fields that occur around a current carrying wire.
Lets assume that a free charged incident particle and its field are rotating as a whole. This is because the spin of the incident particle would drag the EPPs surrounding it in a circular motion and those EPPs drag the next layer and so on. So the incident particle and its field are rotating around the magnetic polar axis of the whole field. As this discussion progresses, we shall see that the spinning EPP fields are responsible for the circular magnetic fields that occur around a current carrying wire.
The electron in the outer shells of atoms are not bound so tightly to the nucleus, so lets assume that these outer electrons and their fields continue to rotate about their polar axis whilst remaining loosely connected to atom. If the unpaired electrons in a ferromagnetic material were to align themselves in the way shown in figure 14 below, we can see that the electrons and their fields positioned opposite each other are rotating in opposite directions.
The EPPs in the outer part of an EPP field have less energy and are more easily separated from their field. In figure 14 we can see that the EPP fields belonging to the two incident electrons at the top of the magnet are aligned so that their spinning motion would be inclined to push EPPs out of the magnet itself and into the space around it. The EPP fields belonging to the incident electrons at the bottom of the magnet are spinning in such a way that they would be inclined to pull EPPs into the magnet from the surrounding space. All the EPP fields in between the top and bottom are aligned to reinforce this motion. So, as EPPs are thrown out at the top of the magnet, more EPPs are pushed along to replace them by the EPPs fields below and this creates a channel of EPPs moving in from the bottom of the magnet and being thrown out at the top. Outside of the magnet, there would be a surplus of EPPs at the top and a deficit at the bottom, so EPPs from the top would begin to move towards the bottom and this creates channels of flowing EPPs outside of the magnet as we can see in figure 15 below.
If we were to take two magnets and align them so that a north pole was facing another north pole, the EPPs would be flowing out of both and cause the the two poles to move further apart. If we placed to south poles facing each other, both would pulling in EPPs from the space around them and the flow of EPPs into the space in between the two poles would also cause the two poles to move further apart.
If we placed the south pole of one magnet facing the north pole of the other, the EPPs would flow out of the north pole of one magnet and into the south pole of the other and this would cause the two poles to move towards each other.
If we placed the south pole of one magnet facing the north pole of the other, the EPPs would flow out of the north pole of one magnet and into the south pole of the other and this would cause the two poles to move towards each other.
The alignment of the EPPs flowing within the magnet itself would probably become disorganized due to the push and pull of the spinning EPP fields plus the push and pull in various directions from the electromagnetic forces of the individual particles themselves. So, I am assuming that they realign themselves with each other in the way shown below in figure 16.
The alignment is north to south pole for each particle. I am assuming this alignment because the magnetic direction for each individual particle is in the same direction as the spinning EPP fields therefore, there would be less resistance to the flow of EPPs through the channel. Also, the combined magnetic direction of each individual particle is moving in the same direction as the flow of EPPs itself. Although the particles may be spinning in different directions to each other, the combined, overall magnetic direction of each particle is the same.
We also have to take into account the pulsation of the EPPs. It is fair to assume that some of the EPPs would switch off during the time it takes them to move from one pole to another, but the EPPs traveling through the magnet itself would continue to be switched on by the spinning EPP fields, so, instead of the pulse continuing in an outward direction through the field, it begins to move through the chain of newly aligned EPPs that flow out of the magnet, keeping them switching on and off.
We also have to take into account the pulsation of the EPPs. It is fair to assume that some of the EPPs would switch off during the time it takes them to move from one pole to another, but the EPPs traveling through the magnet itself would continue to be switched on by the spinning EPP fields, so, instead of the pulse continuing in an outward direction through the field, it begins to move through the chain of newly aligned EPPs that flow out of the magnet, keeping them switching on and off.
If we were to impose an external magnetic field on to an incident electron and its EPP field, the electron and its field would align itself in the way shown in figure 17 below.
The electrons that make up the outer layer of the incident electrons EPP field would align themselves so that their magnetic direction is moving in the same direction as the flow of EPPs because this is the alignment of least resistance.
If an electron in motion were to enter an external magnetic field parallel to the field, the rotation of its own EPP field would cause it to spiral around the flowing EPPs of the magnetic field.
If an electron in motion were to enter an external magnetic field parallel to the field, the rotation of its own EPP field would cause it to spiral around the flowing EPPs of the magnetic field.
However, if a moving incident electron enters the magnetic field at an angle perpendicular to the flow of EPPs that make up the external magnetic field, the situation is a little more complicated, but not too complicated.
As the electron enters the field the path of the external magnetic field is curled around the electron. This causes the rotating EPP field of the incident electron to align itself with the flow of EPPs of the external magnetic field so that they are flowing in the same direction, as shown in figure 18.
As the electron enters the field the path of the external magnetic field is curled around the electron. This causes the rotating EPP field of the incident electron to align itself with the flow of EPPs of the external magnetic field so that they are flowing in the same direction, as shown in figure 18.
The electrons that make up the outer layer of the incident electrons EPP field are all spinning in the same direction as each other, but the important thing to remember here is that the spinning direction of each particle is helical. Because the Electrons of the EPP field are all aligned with each other, their helical direction also combines and moves all the way down the field from the north pole to the south.
So, when the external magnetic field curls around the EPP field of the incident electron, the EPP field of the incident electron is actually turning with a helical motion and this converts the rotational motion of the field into a linear motion and the incident electron and its field moves in a direction perpendicular to the direction of the external magnetic field and perpendicular to the direction of its original velocity.
So, when the external magnetic field curls around the EPP field of the incident electron, the EPP field of the incident electron is actually turning with a helical motion and this converts the rotational motion of the field into a linear motion and the incident electron and its field moves in a direction perpendicular to the direction of the external magnetic field and perpendicular to the direction of its original velocity.
If a moving incident electron enters an external magnetic field in the opposite direction to the above example, the external magnetic field would curl around the incident electron in the opposite direction to the above example, which also aligns the incident electron in the opposite direction as shown in figure 19 below.
In this case the helical motion of the EPPs is also in the opposite direction of the first example, so, the electron would move in the opposite direction.
The EPP field of a positron always ends with a layer of positrons and their helical direction is opposite of the electron. So, if we were to swap the incident electron for a positron in the examples above, the incident positron would move in exactly the opposite direction to that of an incident electron. Thus we have a mechanical explanation of the Lorentz force.
The EPP field of a positron always ends with a layer of positrons and their helical direction is opposite of the electron. So, if we were to swap the incident electron for a positron in the examples above, the incident positron would move in exactly the opposite direction to that of an incident electron. Thus we have a mechanical explanation of the Lorentz force.
Figure 20 below shows a cross section of a conducting wire and how the same principle applies to an electrical current.
Figure 21 shows how the spinning fields of all the outer moving electrons combine to form a circular flow of EPPs around the conductor which we observe as a circular magnetic field.
Of course the free electrons in the conductor only move a short distance and are only aligned in this way when they are pushed along by their helical motion interacting with the external magnetic field. But, as they move forward their fields push into the fields of other EPP fields ahead of them, causing those electron to move forward. Of course, I have to assume that the angular momentum of the EPP fields is also transferred as the fields bump into each other and push each other along the conductor creating a circular magnetic field all along the conductor.
A virtual universe ?
Lets just assume for the moment that the basic idea of this model is true and that the elementary particles do indeed pulsate. In this model, matter and space are the same thing, in the sense that space is just the extension of matter and both are constructed of pulsating particles. If the energy that the particles are constructed of is constantly disappearing into hidden dimensions and reappearing to create our own 4 dimensions, it would mean that everything in our universe has only a temporary existence in the sense that everything we see around us and indeed, ourselves, only exists for fleeting moments. It is only the fact that those fleeting moments are continuously appearing and disappearing at a rapid rate that gives us the impression of a continuous, permanent universe.
An important aspect of this model to bear in mind is that the particle do not appear into space, nor do they occupy space, but they they actually create space. So, the apparent space between two objects is actually constructed of particles and these particles pulsate in and out of existence. When the particles switch off and disappear, space disappears with them. Therefore, the space, or the distance between two objects is just an illusion and if distance is an illusion, then our 3 spatial dimensions of length, breadth and height are an illusion.
An important aspect of this model to bear in mind is that the particle do not appear into space, nor do they occupy space, but they they actually create space. So, the apparent space between two objects is actually constructed of particles and these particles pulsate in and out of existence. When the particles switch off and disappear, space disappears with them. Therefore, the space, or the distance between two objects is just an illusion and if distance is an illusion, then our 3 spatial dimensions of length, breadth and height are an illusion.
The 4th dimension of time is measured by the relative motion of object through space. But, in this model, objects and space can seen as an illusion. Therefore time must also be an illusion too.
Of course, there is nothing to say that anything I have written on this website is true. This is a matter I will have to leave to the experts. But, if pulsating particles ever did prove to be a reality of the universe, we would have to begin to come to terms with the idea that our universe doesn't actually exist ! . . . At least, not in the way that we think it does.
Of course, there is nothing to say that anything I have written on this website is true. This is a matter I will have to leave to the experts. But, if pulsating particles ever did prove to be a reality of the universe, we would have to begin to come to terms with the idea that our universe doesn't actually exist ! . . . At least, not in the way that we think it does.