Saturday, 15 May 2010
The Problem With My Theory
Millions of people all over the world are being fooled by the non-existing electrons.
Here is how the electrons came into existence. Thomson invented an imaginary baby and called it an electron.
Rutherford adopted it and now the men with the long hair are nursing it.
If you've ever read Leedskalnin's book "Magnetic Current", you'll know that he was non-too-impressed with modern science's portrayal of the electron. The electron is said to be a tiny particle that whizzes around a massive nucleus, made up by protons and neutrons. The neutron has the same mass as a proton BUT has no charge. The electron has a negative charge that effectively cancels the opposing positive charge of the proton to produce a neutral atom.
Following the pioneering experiments that took place with discharge tubes in the 19th Century, it has been supposed that electricity is the flow of electrons, or rather, wiggling electrons that do not move, but allow "current" to pass through. I suspected that this electric current had something to do with the fluid aether, so I set-about trying to design a new model for the atom that was based in aether theory.
In the previous post, Dr.Paul Rowe was illustrating his theory that hydrogen could be produced in a vacuum, and he does so in the unconventional, but most charming, form of a play, "The Fall and Rise of the House Of Cards." Rowe had personally experienced the appearance of hydrogen following experiments where he detonated explosives containing aluminum flake in vacuum. Intrigued by the presence of hydrogen, Rowe began to investigate other experiments where hydrogen was procured from a vacuum. It became more apparent that the early pioneering experimenters were also aware of the puzzling appearance of hydrogen, under certain conditions, in an extreme vacuum. The conclusion that Rowe comes to is that a vacuum is not a void, but a "concentrated matrix of protons and electrons". The matrix to which Rowe refers is better known, in some circles, as the luminiferous aether.
I at first thought I might be able to give something of my own ideas to Rowe's theory, but instead, it has shown me that there is a problem with my model of the atom (at least it now gives me an opportunity to develop a much better one!) The problem with my theory arises because I have designed the electron as a structure in the aether. I had concieved the proton and electron as dipolar vortices in the aether, so that I could go on to construct an atom that looked like a vortex ring - a donutom (I figured that the neutron would later emerge as being part of the mass that made up a donutom.)
I imagined electricity, not as a flow of electrons, but as a flow in the aether - similar to the wind that flows between high and low weather systems. Indeed, I thought of the electron as a cyclone which sucked up the aether and it was this force that was somehow generating negative electricity. Positive electricity would be a force generated by the proton as it blows out the aether. To me, electricity was not so much a flow of electrons, but a flow of aether energy through a chain of protons and/or electrons. Though electricity was a seperate entity to protons and electrons - it was inextricably linked to them. This makes sense when you think of electricity flowing through conductors, but what of the electricity that passes through a vacuum? It would mean that negative electricity in a vacuum must be involved with electrons. In many ways, the electricity which I tried to concieve from the aether, shares the same inhibition as mainstream theory - in that electricity is a fundamental property of matter.
Theoretically, dipolar vortices can be created in the aether fluid by "something" that was able to move very, very fast - and if I understand fluid dynamics correctly - it would have to be moving faster than the speed of light. That "something" is electricity. If the proton and electron are created AFTER the passing of electricity - that means electricity was present BEFORE the creation of the dipolar vortices. This is important because it highlights a problem with my theory, in that electricity can exist independently of matter. If the electricity is not made up of electrons torn off the electrode, then it becomes more obvious that electricity, and more specifically the electron, is strictly a property of the aether.
Rowe's investigations were heavily centred on hydrogen arising from the fluid aether in an extreme vacuum. The electron, which in my hypothesis should also be present, perhaps in the form of helium, is conspicuous in its absence.
I'm missing something. Somewhere I've misunderstood something. I'm still convinced that the atom looks something like a donutom, but not quite the way that I have so far envisioned. I don't think the electron exists as a vortex in the aether - that's if the electron even exists at all. It's time to don my top-hat and return to the 19th Century, to take another look at those early experiments with electrical discharges in vacuum tubes, and to finally understand why they gave birth to the electron.
A copy of Leedskalnin's book "Magnetic Current" is available here:
You can read Rowe's play, "The Fall and Rise of the House Of Cards" thanks to a post on Sepp Hasslberger's blog: