New Book: The Anpheon

Gerald Lebau just published his long awaited book, The Anpheon (the anatomy, physiology, histology and embryology of nature). Get it here.

also check out Lebau's other offerings.

A Flower for Einstein: New Book from Gerald Lebau!

Jerry has just finished his new book "A Flower for Einstein," available now in both print and ebook form from lulu.com

Description:
This book analyzes Einstein's 1905 STR paper and proves that it was radically revised at the last moment. It shows many mathematical errors in the published version and then reconstructs the vastly better initial version. The "flower" is a simple equation placed near the end of the book. It will completely revise quantum theory.

http://www.lulu.com/content/1005469

SpinbitZ and Sorce Theory: Two new books!

I finally published my philosophy opus, SpinbitZ: Volume I. And upon that work I based my expansions to the Sorce Theory model in a newly completed book called Sorce Theory: Unlocking the Basement. Both books can be downloaded free and print versions can be ordered for the cost of printing at lulu.com. Enjoy!

perplexed by Saturn's hexagon?

perplexed by Saturn's hexagon?




run the following links through your analogy engine…

http://www.physorg.com/news66924222.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cymatics

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7253148167 375317006&q=cymatics

Black hole 'mystery'

The following is another great post from mindX.

Re: Black hole 'mystery'
posted on 07/24/2006 8:07 AM by Extropia

We are all taught to believe that a supermassive black hole lurks at the centre of our Milky Way...but something is wrong. This black hole is popularly thought to be responsible for the X-ray flares coming from the middle of our galaxy, but recent observations show that these flares fire roughly every 20 minutes and this is a regularity that is not easily explained in terms of the behaviour of a black hole.

But what about the ES model of galaxy behaviour with its less fanciful explanation for the X-ray flares? Does it account for the cycles? According to Thornhill's Email:

"The answer is yes, because we are dealing with electrical circuits and not imaginary physical objects. There is a very good paper on the related topic of pulsar emissions, which from a plasma discharge perspective can be explained in detail as due to a magnetospheric circuit of a normal stellar object."

As Tony Peratt puts it: The flickering of a light in Los Angeles does not mean that the supply source, a waterfall or hydroelectric dam in the Pacific Northwest, has abruptly changed dimensions or any other physical property. The flickering comes from electrical changes at the observed load or radiative source, such as the formation of instabilities or virtual anodes or cathodes in charged particle beams that are orders of magnitude smaller than the supply. BIZZARE AND INTERESTING NON-PHYSICAL INTERPRETATIONS ARE OBTAINED if the flickering light is interpreted by a distant observer to be both the source and the supply. This holds true for astrophysical plasmas". (My emphasis)

The regularity and short period are a function of circuit parameters and not the characteristics of a physical object'.

Of course, any sane scientifically-minded person would place their faith, not in laboratory-tested models but theoretical maths. If you are one of these kinds of people, you might prefer to follow the mainstream as it tries to use 'dark matter' to fix this anomoly. The ES community cannot use this universal patch for all discrepancies between prediction and observation since OUR model of galaxies works fine without it.

Holarchy and the "Forces": Q & A, with Robert K

The following dialogue is abstracted from a recent thread at mindX.

07/19/2006 2:06 PM by robertkernodle

_____________________

robertkernodle: What is electricity?

czarstar: If you put an electrical current through water the hydrogen separates from the oxygen. What does this say about the properties of electricity?

subtillioN: That is has the power to reorganize or reharmonize molecular arrangements.

robertkernodle: So, electricity is a type of reorganizing and reharmonizing of molecular arrangements.

subtillioN: That's what it can *do*, at any rate.

robertkernodle: It is a type of action, different from the action of gravity, different from the action of the "strong force", different from the action of the "weak force".

subtillioN: Different yet integral to them all. In Sorce Theory (or at least in the SpinbitZ version of Sorce theory), the "electrical force" is a primary level force, more fundamental than the strong and weak forces. Electrons are made out of electricity, not the other way around.

robertkernodle: It is action at one scale. Gravity is action at another scale.

subtillioN: Actually, both are ultimately scale independent, in Sorce Theory. A gravitational field is merely a wave-equilibrated electrical (pressure) gradient.

robertkernodle: The idea of scale independence flat out bothers me here. "Electricity" is something that is relative to a certain range of human size.

subtillioN: Sure, yes. The effect, as all effects, is measured relative to the human form. But to assume that this relation is fundamental to the source of the effect, is an anthropocentrism, imho.

robertkernodle: It's a tricky boat ride--- to divorce our own specific human configuration from the picture, while being in the very significant configurational vantage point of that picture's viewing.
I'm not sure anthropocentrism is such a bad thing. I don't mean anthro-ego-pocentrism, however. (^__^) I mean that the human configuration IS significant in the universe, as it is the prime vantage point of our sense of meaning. We ARE the stuff of the universe come to a very unique coagulation of self reflection. How can we not be in awe and somewhat proud of this?

subtillioN: Yes, anthropocentrism is where we are. The point is to recognize it, as you already do, I think. But my more pointed point was that assuming some absolute difference in scale, such as the different applicabilities of the forces, is a function of perspective, and there ultimately is no difference in applicability per different scale in the already differentiated holarchy of scales.

robertkernodle: Even from Lebau's viewpoint, human beings are sorce effects of the fine-energy medium. We are the vibes of the aether. We are specific "notes", in a sense, or "note agglomerations" [my fanciful terms here].

subtillioN: Certainly, yes.

robertkernodle: Differences seeemingly have to somehow know-as-they-"create" the relative scales between them. This is a sort of relativity. If things don't interact as though organizing through an established gradient of different relative sizes, then how can anything happen?
Scale independence seems to knock the foundation out from under hierarchical emergence of form.
I was attempting to make sense of things by taking a point of view that MOTION (rather than DEFINITION of a "what") is the better way to understand electricity and other forces, ... as Lebau seems to do.
But to do this seems to require a hierarchy of interacting scales, where motion at one scale is perceived by an organized configuration (called "human") as different from motion at another scale relative to that humnan configuration. It's merely a consequence of our being at one scale that we call forces by different names.

subtillioN: The holarchical relationship between different scales of action is critical. Scale independence does not destroy the holarchy. Precisely the opposite. When I say scale independence, I don’t mean it uniformly or absolutely. I mean recursively.
But why must the forces be absolutely confined to one level and not operational, even if enfolded, at higher or deeper levels, in order to maintain the holarchy of scales?

robertkernodle: I have no conflict with this statement. I find total resonance with it, in fact. I guess I don't quite get what "scale independent" always means.

subtillioN: I was using it loosely, I suppose. It simply means that the forces act on all scales, if differently in different relations between the different configurations of the scales. If that makes any sense.
When I say electricity and gravitation are operational at all scales, I mean within the infinite holarchy. In Sorce Theory, electricity is the flow of pressurized “fine-energy substance,” and this occurs in the actual production and maintanence of the harmonic configuration of the nucleus and its “electron” shells, as it does on the level of stars and its maintanence and production of its electromagnetic sheaths and orbital dynamics, as it does on the level of the galaxy with its homopolar motor structure etc. Gravity is merely the interaction across scales of the holarchy between equilibrated electrical fields. For instance, the equilibrated density/pressure gradient of the atom in interaction with the pervading equilibrated field of a planet.

robertkernodle: All forces are motions of fine-energy substance operating via varrying densities and coagulations at different scales, which define them uniquely with respect to one another.

subtillioN: yep

robertkernodle: QUESTION: What is the difference between the size of the scale of the strong force and the weak force?

subtillioN: The strong force has a range about the size of a medium-sized nucleus because it is an abstraction for the fluid-dynamical tendency for a nucleus to self-stabilize. The weak force has a range of around the size of a proton because it is an abstraction for the fluid-dynamical tendency for a nucleus to destabilize. All the forces are merely accounting categories for tendencies in particular fluid-dynamical arrangements and organizations, in Sorce Theory. Very simple, really, at the general level.

subtillioN: So when you said, "It's merely a consequence of our being at one scale that we call forces by different names," as far as Sorce Theory goes, this is a bit of an over-simplification. The different abstract accounting categories of force are indeed partly a function of relative scale, but there is another general aspect to consider here, namely organization and pattern. For example, as I mentioned previously, the "strong force" is merely a name we call the tendency for the self-stabilization of an atomic nucleus in a favorable environment, and the weak force is a name for the much weaker tendency of a nucleus to decay when it encounters an environment not conducive to its self-stabilization. Though these forces do have slightly different "ranges of action", clearly that is not the whole picture. Another example, electricity is a primary-level force (or The Force) because it deals with the raw pressure of the "fine energy substance." This is why is has polarity as a fundamental feature. The force of gravitation, however, occurs within the environment of an already stabilized nuclear configuration, and specifically upon those smaller-scale nuclei embedded within it. Indeed, within the fine-scale substance, there are ever-deeper levels of nucleation that have their own gradients and embedded, gravitating sub-units. The category of the gravitational force, therefore, is critically a result of organization and not scale. This is what I mean by scale independence. Scale plays a role, but only marginally in its differentiation of organized units, and their interplays upon its axis.

“Neutron Star” Refutes Its Own Existence

XMM-Newton's
view of supernova remnant RCW 103

http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2006/arch06/060721neutronstar.htm

More difficulties for the standard theory of supernovae and “neutron stars”—a misbehaving “supernova remnant.”

In the past few decades of space exploration, we have grown accustomed to seeing certain words and phrases in the scientific press release. It would be difficult or impossible to enumerate all of the instances when space discoveries have been met with shock and perplexity by mainstream investigators. "This is a complete surprise"..."This should not be"..."We're not sure"...Given the confidence with which the cosmological big picture is presented in scientific media, one would think that such statements would be rare, but in fact, almost none of the milestone findings of the space age were expected.

Recently, astronomers announced the discovery of a "mystery object" that, according to conventional wisdom, should be a very "young" neutron star, yet behaves like one that is several million years old. According to the Space.com report, "Embedded in the heart of a supernova remnant 10,000 light-years away is a stellar object the likes of which astronomers have never seen before in our galaxy. At first glance, the object looks like a densely packed stellar corpse known as a neutron star surrounded by a bubble of ejected stellar material, exactly what would be expected in the wake of a supernova explosion.” [more]

Electric Universe: A Classic Case of Paradigm Incommensurability

In Bad Astronomy and Universe Today forums, the following calculation was presented (please see the link for accurate rendering of equations).

http://www.bautforum.com/showthread.php?t=41877

The author says, "Well, let’s see what mainstream physics has to say about it." Well, mainstream physics tends to inject it's own biases and preconceptions, equations and assumptions into an entirely different model where they simply don't apply. This is a classic case of "paradigm incommensurability," as we will see. Aspects of one paradigm generally don't apply to the other, and vice versa.

See my post-comments below for the quick and easy check and mate.

Okay, this has already been written once in several mails, now it is collected in one concise message. Is the sun a ball of hot gas with fusion in the centre or is it a discharge according to Juergens? Well, let’s see what mainstream physics has to say about it.

Total Energy produced by the Sun in 1 second:

From the general mainstream model the fusion in the core of the sun produces 4.3 million tonnes (4.3 10^9 kg) equivalent of energy per second so with the well known equation E = MC2 (Thanks Albert !, E is energy, M is the totall mass and C is the velocity of light 3 10^8 m/s) we can find the total power P:

P = 4.3 10^9 x (3 10^8)2 / 1 second = 3.9 10^26 Joules/s

With an arbitrary voltage of a billion volts from the Sun and exterior space, according to Juergens in a “double layer” above the suns surface and P = UI (where U is the total potential drop in Volts and I is the total current in Amperes), we can calculate a current

I = P / U = 3.9 10^26 / 109 = 3.9 10^17 A.

So, now we come to the circuit around the sun, inflowing current in the equatorial plane and outflowing current along the poles of the sun, this all in accordance with Alfvén’s circuit model (see Cosmic Plasma, page 55, Figure III.7).

Learning from the Earth where the current sheet thickness is on the order of the Earth’s radius, therefore we will assume that the current flowing to the sun has a thickness on the order of the suns radius.

Now we look at what may be observed near Earth if indeed this current flows in the circuit, driving the energy output of the sun as in Juergens’ model.

For a plane current sheet we can estimate the magnetic field by using Maxwell's equations. One equation, Ampere's Law, says that the variation of the magnetic field produced by a current is given by:

curl B = mu0 (J + epsilon0 dE/dt),

here curl is an operator that basically takes the derivative of the magnetic field in all three cartesian coordinates. In the case when we have a sheet of current, we can simplify this equation. We assume time stationarity (the sun shines at basically the same rate without major variations so that is no real problem) which means that any time derivative, like dE/dt will be 0. Assuming an infinite sheet in the x and y direction there is only variation in z and the equation simplifies to:

dB/dz = mu0 J,

and here we can make an estimate of the variation of the magnetic field from one side of the current sheet to the other by changing this differential into a difference dB/dz -> delta B / delta z. The delta B we do not know but the delta z is the thickness of the current sheet, so we find:

Delta B / L = mu0 J,

where we know L, the radius of the sun (7 10^8 m), and we can calculate J from the total current I (above) and saying that it flows through a “ribbon” of L wide and a circumference of 2 pi REarth-sun (1 AU = 1.5 10^11 m),

J = 3.9 10^17 / (2 pi 1.5 10^11 7 10^8 = 6 10-4 Amp/m2

and thus with mu0 = 4 pi 10-7 we find for the magnetic field near the Earth produced by that current system:

delta B = mu0 J L = 0.5 Tesla

Now, what magnetic field strengt his measured near the Earth? We measure field in the nano-Tesla range (see e.g. data from the Cluster spacecraft in the solar wind (the middle part in the linked plot), so that means that this model is roughly 1 billion (American) 109 times too strong, give or take a factor of 3!

And then other observations, e.g. by the Ulysses spacecraft over the poles of the sun (here is a plot of the magnetic field strength measured by the mission from start to date), have not shown any signature AFAIK of strong toroidal magnetic fields associated with the outflowing currents.

Impressive calculations perhaps, but the end result is entirely useless because of a very simple error right at the beginning. The calculation bases its power output (3.9 10^26 Joules) on the "fusion in the core" from the "general mainstream model." From that result, right out of mainstream physics, it then derives the current supposedly expected from the EU model. But in the EU model there is no fusion going on in the core. The only fusion going on is that at the photosphere. The gravitational fusion-in-the-core assumption is a purely hypothetical aspect of the mainstream model only. indeed, gravitational thermonuclear fusion has never been achieved in the laboratory, while the z-pinch fusion in the EU model has been achieved over and over. This calculation, therefore, uses a VASTLY inflated number for the total power output and hence for its derived magnetic field strength at the distance of the earth.

It is therefore fundamentally incorrect due to faulty assumptions right at the beginning. A case of injecting the assumptions of the favored model into the opponent to render it incoherent. A subtle straw-man effigy derived from an unconscious paradigm incommensurability.

ICOPS and "The Electric Comet"

From thunderbolts.info




"The Electric Comet," an ICOPS presentation now available as a PDF

We have placed a PDF of the poster presentation "The Electric Comet" here. This 20-page-synopsis is preliminary to the more detailed report provided in the monograph The Electric Universe, due out later this year. We invite you to forward this link to others.

Electro-Fractal Universe: Free pdf ebook !

Fractal Universe: Free pdf ebook !

Fractal Universe - A Pictorial Hypothesis by Colin Hill

«The universe consists of a series of spiral bodies of
diminishing size, each made in turn by plasma ejection
and moulded by a spatial Coriolis effect:
a rotating fractal universe.»



This website is accompanied by a book which can be downloaded free of charge.

Electro-fractal Universe eBook [ 902Kb ]

A report from the (IEEE) International Conference on Plasma Science (ICOPS 2006)

The IEEE, Plasma Cosmology and Extreme Ball Lightning
A report from the (IEEE) International Conference on Plasma Science (ICOPS 2006)

The IEEE, Plasma Cosmology and Extreme Ball Lightning

This is a report on a few aspects of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) International Conference on Plasma Science (ICOPS 2006), held in Michigan earlier this month. The IEEE is the world's leading professional association for the advancement of technology, with more than 365,000 members. The labours of these large numbers of professionals have driven technological progress in the twentieth century. Their success has often been equated with scientific progress, which has allowed the stagnation in the hard sciences to be overlooked. It is engineers who have made space exploration possible, and their precision probes and navigation skills have returned data that routinely surprises space scientists. After each surprise the scientists scuttle back to their drawing boards but they only touch-up the old picture. Perhaps it is time for engineers to bring new concepts to the drawing board. [more]

Sorce Theory: Unlocking the Basement - Summary and Context

The following summary and context for the forthcoming article, Sorce Theory: Unlocking the Basement, is cross-posted at: www.spinbitz.net . I have posted it here because it has direct relevance on the Sorce Theory model.

It is important to note, however, that this expansion does not alter the model itself except to put it into a modern philosophical context, or meta-paradigm, allowing the model to be more easily cross-fertilized and catalyzed with other models and truths in other domains. Simply put, it makes the model "integral," non-reductionistic and nondual, leaving all it's explanations intact and adding new ones below the limits, or axioms (the "basic items") of the current model. Therefore, it is a personal preference if one adopts this meta-paradigm and expansion for the model or if one prefers the materialistic and reductionistic context. The model works by itself just the same.

Sorce Theory: Unlocking the Basement

Summary and Context

From the introduction:

Sorce Theory is a rigorously causal and extremely detailed theoretical paradigm of fundamental physics based on the wave-harmonics and fluid-dynamics of a continuous and compressible subatomic superfluid as the medium for the "wave-nature" of matter and energy at all observable levels in the cosmos. It is the conceptual operating system for a radical reinterpretation, reorientation and reintegration of fundamental physical reality. The main beneficial feature it imparts upon those who would venture to install this OS and take it for a test run, is a visceral sense of organismic unity and self-similar harmony permeating the cosmos because it allows one to visualize the unification of the forces and the self-similarity of the patterns between the macro and the micro levels, and in this way it unifies the core macro-micro schism (relativity vs. the quantum) infecting all of modern physics and cosmology. It resolves this core-level problem by digging beneath the axiomatic wave-particle paradox and its attendant neuroses of “weirdness,” schizophrenic “complementarity,” “indeterminacy,” acausality and the entanglement of consciousness in the "collapse of the wave-function". Sorce Theory finds a new, self-similar integration and a unity for all known physical energy forms, and all known forces, in purely visualizable and causal terms.

There is a slight problem with this model as it stands, however, in that the paradigm is built on a tacit “foundational” ontology, and these foundational models have been rendered highly problematic through the last hundred years of research in epistemological models of truth and justification (i.e. the study of what constitutes a valid approach to constructing a knowledge-system (episteme) of the ultimately real (ontic)). For instance, the original Sorce Theory model assumes a fundamental level (scale) of absolute fluid-continuity from which the first forms of the discrete and solid emerge, i.e. the atoms. Albeit highly useful, successful, and perhaps even originally necessary, Sorce Theory’s “continuity bias” is perhaps a direct reactionary reflection of the “particle bias” to which it rightly attributes (and brilliantly corrects through its reaction) the host of problems—compartmental incompatibilities, “quantum weirdness,” acausalities and paradoxes—plaguing the orthodox family of physical models. This whole problem of continuity reductionism, and reductionism in general, is merely because Sorce Theory retains the common foundationalism inherent in all physical theories, and physics (not to mention philosophy) has not caught up to the bleeding edge of the evolution of rationality.

This article opens Sorce Theory's axiomatic foundations, from their subtle "continuity/fluidity reductionism," and foundationalism to a deeper, more integrated, nondual, holistic (holarchical) and "trans-foundational", analysis. The result is that the truths gained from scientific explorations with the solid-/particle- or discrete-bias--such as the inertial theory of pressure and the Venturi effect--which were previously denied, can be non-reductively (non-foundationally) reintegrated at deeper levels and used to explain many aspects of the "basic items" that were previously taken as axiomatic. The model then becomes trans-axiomatic and trans-foundational, and opens itself to causal analysis, and recursive catalysis (or self-similar feedback and resonance) at ALL possible levels, revealing a likely (empirically-derived) fractal aspect and self-similarity to the cosmos along the "axis of scale" (or the "immanent/transcendent axis" in the forthcoming "Vision-Logic Coordinate System" or VCS, upon which the article depends for publication).

This new analysis provides a resonance with the emerging fractal models of the cosmos, such as the "Self-similar Cosmological Model" by Rob Oldershaw. The "AQAL-compliant" meta-paradigm provided by SpinbitZ, (along with the Univocity Framework and the VCS) allows the newly extended Sorce Theory to open itself to the truths gained from the solid-/particle-bias (e.g. the inertial aspect of the Kinetic-atomic theory of pressure) while operationally maintaining a non-reductionistic and non-foundational (nondual) stance. The fluid and solid aspects of matter (e.g. "fundamental particles" or the emerging "superfluid aether" paradigms, respectively), are prohibited from assuming an "ultimate" or foundational ("fundamental") status, and instead enter a polar, or non-dual, relationship along the axis of scale. The wave and the particle (and by corollary, the continuous and the discrete, and the fluid and solid, etc), become symbiogenetic, or “other-engendering,” self-similar and recursively regenerating concepts. They are the two basic modes or morphologies of existence wherein each one includes, and is composed of the other at the next deeper level. Every wave (or fluid continuum) is made of particles and each of those particles is in turn made of vortices of deeper waves (of a deeper-level fluid continuum) which in turn are made of more particles and more waves, ad infinitum.

This holarchically polar, or nondual relationship between the amorphousness of fluidity, and the formed solidity of particles, is analogous to the nondual 'emptiness' and 'form,' respectively. In this analysis, a new holarchical theory of pressure, the single-force in Sorce Theory, is put forth and the "basic items" of Sorce Theory are placed in a holarchical, transcend-and-include, relationship, or a conceptual and cellular "differentiate-and-integrate" "embryogenesis" as intuited by Gerald Lebau in his concept of "ANPHEON: The Anatomy, Physiology, Histology and Embryology of Nature." This new map of inter-relations between the basic items opens them all up to inter-analysis and allows for some further insights to be gained into all areas of the "basement level." The concepts included among these new analyses of "basic level" matter are: an explication of the causal, fluid-mechanical nature of the critical non-linear property called "ontropy," as well as an understanding of the "abquom" (absolute quantity of motion), as a holarchical function of temporal scaling laws. Furthermore, the new holarchical model of the basement-level reveals a holarchical relationship between the higher level forces emergent from the basic properties of matter, which includes the basic force of pressure (itself reducible as a function of the basic items "matter" and "motion").

...stay tuned for the publication of this article...

New Website! SpinbitZ.net

I have created a new website at www.spinbitz.net. The purpose of this website is provide a home for my work in progress which will provide a modern and integral "meta-paradigm" as a conceptual context within which Sorce Theory can be integrated with other modes of knowledge as well as the other emerging physical-science paradigms such as the truly exciting Electric Universe models and the Self-Similar (Fractal) Cosmological models. The following, from a post at mindX, seems to state this convergence nicely.

Cosmic Catalysis
posted on 06/01/2006 1:11 PM by subtillioN

...Sorce Theory, Fractal or Self-Similar Cosmology and EU, while created in ignorance of each other (though in tight correspondence with the empirical data from the universe), are very tightly interwoven in my mind. There is a trememdous amount of cross-fertilization ready to take place between these models it is really exciting to me the degree of coherence and unity this proto model already provides and is ultimately capable of becomming. To bad I don't have the time to do the work as of now, given my other current commitments to my own meta-paradigm or philosophical work which helps provide a stronger conceptual "foundation".

For example, Sorce Theory gives a self-similar description of the unity between the macro and micro which results in the causal unification and explanation of the "fundamental forces" and it explains how an electrical field gets converted into a gravitational field to form a stabilized and equilibrated "matter-unit" such as an atom and a star (and a planet, to an extent), and how it gets converted back into an electromagnetic field when it is disrupted, e.g. E=mc2. But Sorce Theory could gain much from a cross-fertilization w/ EU and the plasma pinch processes shown in the laboratory. And likewise, as Eric Lerner points out in his The Big Bang Never Happened, there is much about the quantum level that shows that electrical or plasma processes are likely going on at that level, such as the vorticity of the proton demonstrated by Krisch et al, which also shows the onion-like shelled structure of the nucleus predicted by Sorce Theory.

Sorce Theory really seems to be the self-similar glue between the nascent models of the macro (EU/Sorce) and the micro (Sorce Theory/EU) as it causally unifies the forces, but each would add to the power of the other, catalytically, imho as it naturally generates, corroborates and makes use of the empirical data and scaling equations of the Self-Similar Cosmological Model of Oldershaw.


Coming soon to SpinbitZ is an article of direct relevance to Sorce Theory, entitled "Sorce Theory: Unlocking the Basement" which opens Sorce Theory's foundations, from their subtle "continuity reductionism," to deeper, more integrated and holistic, analysis.

Stay Tuned...

New Article! "A Case for a Fluid Substrate"

There is a new article by Juan Calsiano, crosslinked on anpheon.org from Juan's new website (about which I am very excited and hopeful), http://www.aethernitatis.net/. In this article, Juan gathers together an inspiring amount of empirical data to make an extremely solid case for fluidity. A must read!

http://www.aethernitatis.net/articles/fluidic/A_Case_for_a_Fluid_Substrate_-_04_14_2006.pdf

Sorce theory and half-electrons

This blog entry is cross-posted from http://www.kurzweilai.net/mindx/frame.html?main=/mindx/show_thread.php?rootID%3D61043

Sorce theory and half-electrons
posted on 06/07/2006 6:07 AM by Extropia

I have a neato book that introduces the reader to '12 mind-blowing ideas from the cutting edge of science' and one of these talks about a person called Humprey Maris of Brown University who claims to have 'split the electron'. Umm..well it's all rather complex and I can't explain it any better than the original quote:

'Maris is an expert in how matter behaves at ultra-low temperatures. In fact, the possibility that an electron wave function can be split in two first occurred to him while he was thinking about liquid helium. Maris was interested in one of its perculiar features: 'electron bubbles'.

Electron bubbles were first made in the late 1950s when physicists squirted high-speed electrons into liquid helium. The electrons gradually slow down and come to a halt in the liquid. However this presents them with a problem. If at all possible, an electron likes to circle the nucleus of an atom like Earth orbits the Sun. In Liquid helium, however, all the atoms possess their full complement of electrons. With no room at the inn, an interloper has no choice but to lodge itself in the space between helium atoms.

In fact, the electron outcast actually contributes to its own isolation because it fiercely repels the helium all around it. After pushing them away, it ends up floating in an empty bubble in the liquid.

The electron in the electron bubble is described by a wave function. However, there is a restriction on its wave function because only certain wave functions can survive within the bubble. Although the lowest-energy state is the most likely state, the electron in the bubble need not be in it. If the electron has a surplus of energy- and in an experiment this can be supplied by laser light shone on a bubble- it turns out that the wave function in this state is not spherically symmetric but dumbbell-shaped. This means that the most probable places to find the electron are on opposite sides of the bubble.

Liquid helium resists the elongation of an electron bubble, causing it to change slowly and smoothly from a sphere to a dumbbell-shape. But only above a certain temperature. Below this critical temperature, calculated to be 1.7 degrees above absolute zero, the liquid is too runny. As the trapped electron hammered away inside, the bubble would stretch so quickly that it overshot the dumbbell shape...(ultimately) the bubble would split into two smaller bubbles.

"If the electron wave function was dumbbell shaped and the bubble split in two, trapped in each of the daughter bubbles would be half an electron wave function".

If, as quantum theory indicated, the wave function is the essence of the electron, cleaving the wave function would actually break the electron in two. This was revolutionary, explosive stuff (but) some of the experiments he had in mind (to validate his hypothesis) had already been done'.

So what Maris is saying can be cut in half is the electron's wave function. And, since he further claims that the result is two half-electrons, the inescapable conclusion is that the wave function of an electron IS an electron. The thing that everyone has considered a mere mathematical device is in fact the ultimate reality that underpins our world. Everything is made of wave functions.

Look out folks, here comes my attempt to equate this with Sorce Theory. Is there a connection in the way that this property of the electron manifests itself in the superfluid state of liquid helium and Sorce theory's claim that the fundemantal state of reality is best described as the 'motions, refractions and reflections of pressure waves in a continuous, compressible, frictionless, fluid, material medium' aka fluid ether akin to superfluids?

_____________________________

Re: Sorce theory and half-electrons

posted on 06/07/2006 7:11 AM by 7and7is

A bit more on thishttp://www.scienceblog.com/community/older/200 0/C/200002825.html

_____________________________

My response:

I think the connection is obvious. This is exactly the kind of thing that Sorce Theory expects. A wave-function is merely a mathematical abstraction of the actual harmonic "wave-nature" arising from the fluid-properties of quantum level reality, called the basement level in sorce theory. And in general, an "electron" is merely a quantitative measurement, like a gallon, that corresponds to, and is extracted by, the harmonically (there's that wave-nature again) quantized shells of an atom. The shells necessarily quantize in (near) electron amounts, and so when even a continuous charge is impinging on, and equilibrating within an atom (e.g. being "detected"), a quantized amount will be extracted, giving the appearance to any theorist with a particle-biased interpretive filter, that a particle has struck the detector.

But the problem with the unquantum nature of the quantum is much more expansive than that. There is a so-called particle called the "anyon" that was invented for the purpose of "explaining" (or calculating) a phenomenon called the "fractional quantum hall effect" in which charge in an "electron fluid" under complex (turbulent) conditions, can achieve any intermediate value. The function of the anyon for the mathematical model, is to maintain the particle-biased interpretation, and the "particle-biased" facade, in the face of evidence that the deeper "quantum-level" substrate is not quantized into particles.

Physicists Find Unexpected Fluidity in Probing Deeper States of Matter Assumed to be the State of the Big Bang

This post is from Juan Calsiano

http://www.scienceblog.com/cms/node/8497 [ comments embedded in these ] )

Physicists have created the state of matter thought to have filled the Universe just a few microseconds after the big bang and found it to be different from what they were expecting. [The BBT scenario has been refuted several times, as the interpretation of the purely dopplerian redshift has been shown without any doubt that it CAN’T account for lots of different observations, most notably the physical connection between objects of highly different redshifts (and even a quasar in front of a galaxy!). As there is ZERO evidence for any ‘expansion of space’ whatsoever, the whole absurdity of the BBT (Creatio ex Nihilo) can and SHOULD be discarded from any scientific discussion.] Instead of a gas, it is more like a liquid. [As our physicists probe deeper and deeper in their quest for the ‘ultimate particle’ or ‘the material from which all began’, they surprisingly find what modern evidence and quantitative equations has been telling and even our ancients thought about (like Thales and his Ylem), but has been anathema to mention it since M&M and Einstein’s SRT: the ‘ether’. Of course, it isn’t the solid yet impossibly tenuous ether that was disproved then, but a frictionless and compressible fluidic continuum.] Understanding why it is a liquid should take physicists a step closer to explaining the earliest moments of our Universe. [Nothing comes from nothing. What does exist but could not be created, always did exist. There was no ultimate beginning]

Not just any old liquid, either. Its collective movement is rather like the way a school of fish swims 'as one' and is a sign that the fluid possesses an extremely low viscosity, making it what physicists call a perfect fluid. In fact, tentative calculations suggest its extraordinarily low viscosity makes it the most perfect fluid ever created. [In other words, a substance has been empirically found (by mistake, in the sense that they weren’t looking for this) that is remarkably similar to the one that is necessarily needed as the root level metaphysical foundation to explain all physical phenomena qualitatively using causal mechanisms, as explained in Sorce Theory for example. Is it safe to say that this experimental finding is a confirmation for such theoretical construction? I think it is.]

Researchers had confidently believed it would be something like 'steam', consisting of free quarks and gluons. "No one predicted that it would be a liquid," said Professor John Nelson from the University of Birmingham, who heads the British involvement in the STAR Collaboration, a multinational experiment. "This aspect was totally unexpected," said Professor Nelson, "and will lead to new scientific research regarding the properties of matter at extremes of temperature and density, previously inaccessible in a laboratory." [If the experimental findings don’t fit the equations, it is not that a big problem (for them). They can always mathematically ‘update’ (retro-fit) the equations. As a matter of fact, they always do this (check BBT). BUT if you are expecting ‘a steam consisting of free quarks (zero size particles) and gluons’ and you get a superfluid instead, it should be evident that there is something QUITE WRONG in your model.]

The Birmingham contingent is funded entirely by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC).

The new state of matter was forged in the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC), situated at the Brookhaven National Laboratory, Long Island, New York. By colliding the central cores of gold atoms together, head-on at almost the speed of light, the researchers created a fleeting, microscopic version of the Universe a few microseconds after the Big Bang. [I know it seems quite impossible to shrink a Ferrari Testarosa to a cubic millimiter, but it CAN be done, I swear. You can do similarly with a 20 story building, if you have the right tech. And by the way, you can also shrink ALL OBSERVABLE PHYSICAL REALITY to the size of a cell and it will still work. Really. I saw that on TV] This included achieving a temperature of several million million degrees (about 150,000 times the temperature at the centre of the Sun). They then detected the rush of particles that this miniature 'big bang' created. That was when things started to take an unexpected turn.

Instead of the 'every-particle-for-itself, free-for-all' that is expected from a gas, the researchers saw evidence of collective movement as the hot matter, formed at RHIC, flowed out of the collision site. This indicated stronger interactions between the particles than expected, leading to the belief that the quark-gluon plasma is behaving like a liquid.

This type of experiment furthers our understanding of what happened in the instants immediately following the Big Bang, leading to a better understanding of the earliest moments of the Universe. However, the unexpected nature of this new state of matter is leaving physicists wondering if the current theoretical models can support these surprising new experimental results. [Well, whenever it is discovered a ‘new state of matter’ or such like BECS, hypernuclei, fermionic condensate or superfluidic He3, it is always a surprise in the context of the standard model particle+void duality paradigm, but it is always an expected finding in the context of a unified causal superfluidical root level contiguum paradigm. As history tells us, they will probably keep adding patchs (epicycles?) to their model to save the potatoes from the fire, but for the open minded people who can go beyond their own preconceptions, they should already know that their potatoes are quite rotten and we should get some new fresh ones instead. But which is the choice? The answer is hinted in experiments like this.]

From Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council

Updates to ANPHEON.org and change of pace for news

I have fallen waaay behind on my news posting. Meanwhile the news-file keeps piling up. I hope to reconnect later and give the highlights of this growing file as well as commentary.

There are, however, some newsworthy additions to this site. They are as follows:

First, there is a new book published from 1989 called “What it ALL is and WHY”, by du Gabriel. This book is much more detailed and comprehensive than The Orb and it is a lot more fun! Here is the link:
http://home.comcast.net/~anpheon/html/Books/W2/W2_Preface.htm



Secondly, A newly released article (The Relativity Program) has been uploaded to anpheon.org http://home.comcast.net/~anpheon/html/Articles/trp_anphe_1.0.pdf

This article MATHEMATICALLY proves that the physical basis of the Special Theory of Relativity is contradicted by Einstein's own mathematics, thus that the THEORY of relativity is proved false by the very same experiments that confirm the validity of Lorentz's equations themselves. The article lays out the theory as a computer program and walks through it step by step detailing the errors of correlation between the mathematics and the underlying physical theory. Here is the introductory paragraph for those interested.

“The physical and mathematical meanings of the symbols in the equations by which Einstein tried to derive the Lorentz Transformation Equations.”

“The following analysis of Einstein's 1905 relativity paper will show that the physical requirements imposed by the Lorentz Transformation Equations ("LTE") contradict the concepts of the Special Theory of Relativity ("STR"), therefore of present Theoretical Physics as well. Each numbered step, below, is to be taken as a line in a computer-type operating program the equations must obey.”.



And third, here is a draft version of an article by myself dealing with the philosophical and metaphysical issues regarding Sorce Theory and specifically the mind-body problem as it relates to Spinoza’s two attributes. I am requesting critical feedback specifically from all Spinoza scholars as well as anyone else who wishes to contribute. Here’s the link:
http://home.comcast.net/~anpheon/misc/Spinozas_Attribute_Polarity.pdf

Opportunity Favors the Heretic

News and Views From The Electric Universe

“.. modern science seems to have exploded into a multitude of highly specialised areas and distinct disciplines that may at times be interconnected, but that by and large ignore one another. There appears to be an overwhelming trend toward a proliferation of distinct and autonomous “subdivisions”. Researchers in different fields often experience great difficulties understanding each other.”
- Etienne Klein & Marc Lachièze-Rey, THE QUEST FOR UNITY - The Adventure of Physics

The Mars Exploration Rover, Opportunity, is about to begin its voyage of discovery on the surface of Mars. It is an opportunity for heretics to test their expectations in light of the new information pouring in from Mars. Otherwise, interpretations of new discoveries will be fashioned to fit stories created long ago and uncritically disseminated among separate disciplines. For example, astronomers tell geologists that the planets were formed about 4.5 billion years ago. Geologists tell astronomers that craters were formed primarily by impacts of comets, asteroids and meteors. Astronomers tell geologists that there is an invisible reservoir of objects that caused the impacts. Physicists tell geologists that the process of radioactive decay can be trusted as a reliable clock to date rocks. The geologists assure the particle physicists that nothing could have happened in the past to upset these radioactive clocks. Physicists tell astronomers that most of the stable elements which make up the planets and stars were formed primordially in a series of supernova events.

These are all simply stories. Countless facts don’t fit the stories but they are not allowed to spoil the telling. Astronomers have not been able to show theoretically or empirically that the elements came from supernovas or that the planets came from a collapsing nebula. Pointing to evidence of ‘accretion disks’ around some stars simply begs the question. We know from observation that stars can expel matter (which defies gravitational theory). The disks are therefore more likely to be ‘expulsion disks.’ Similarly, geologists have never witnessed a crater formed by cosmic impact. Their attempts to replicate the features of planetary craters by high-velocity impacts or explosions have failed – but the story remains. Products of short-lived radioactive isotopes found in some meteorites contradict the 4.5 billion year story. The elements that would have formed primordially in supernovas don't match the elements found on solar system bodies. Supernovas are rare events that disperse matter.

The resulting rickety edifice of fact and fiction is sold under the name of planetary science. Like the game in which a story is made up by adding disconnected sentences together, it does not make much sense and no one can predict where it is leading. In this ‘Alice in Wonderland’ environment each new discovery must be a surprise. Then the story is simply amended, not rewritten. It clearly demonstrates the dysfunctional nature of over-specialized science.

The only recourse in this situation is to return to the empirical approach to science - that is, to work from the observable present back through time as far as reliable information can be extracted and to undertake laboratory experiments to test ideas. Do not assume old gravito-mechanical theories are relevant in a plasma universe. Accept that theorists do not understand gravity, or electrical effects in plasma. Unfortunately, to take this approach in the age of the theoretician and computer modeller is to brand oneself a heretic.


Comment: I highly recommend reading the full article. It explains the difficulties the Mars researchers are having explaining the phenomena seen by the Opportunity rover and offers a much simpler and more compelling account of the data.

ELEMENT 115 HAS BEEN DISCOVERED - Approaching the Islands of Stability

Latest Physics News



ELEMENT 115 HAS BEEN DISCOVERED
...
The long lifetime observed for element 115 suggests that physicists might be getting closer to the "island of stability," the presumed region on the chart of possible nuclear isotopes for which certain combinations of protons and neutrons (collectively known as nucleons, the regular constituents of all nuclei) are much more stable than some of the other heavy nuclei made artificially at accelerators. In general, nature doesn't produce elements heavier than uranium (element 92) and scientists must resort to colliding smaller nuclei to build up heavyweight elements.

Comment: Standard Physics has no clue why there is a such a pervasive regular periodic pattern to the properties and stabilities of the atomic elements. These patterns, however, are simply understood when the fluid-dynamic and wave-harmonic natures of the atom are realized. Sorce Theory demonstrates the fluid-dynamic formation of the atom and the harmonic stabilisation and quantization of the electronic shell structure into those very regular periodic patterns that the standard model cannot explain.

Holy Hypernuclei!!

New Scientist: "Particle experiment produces abundant hypernuclei

18:38 30 January 04

NewScientist.com news service

A new particle physics experiment has created as many 'hypernuclei' in its first three months of operation as have been produced in the 50 years since the exotic particle was first discovered. Scientists announced the achievement on Friday at a meeting in Bormio, Italy."

Hypernuclei are atomic nuclei combining not just the usual protons and neutrons but also rare particles called hyperons. About 100,000 have been created in an experiment called FINUDA, on the Dafne accelerator at the National Laboratory of Frascati.

Hypernuclei are incredibly short-lived, surviving for less than a billionth of a second. But by studying them scientists hope to learn more about the weak force, one of nature's four fundamental forces, as well as the first moments of the Universe's existence.


Comment: There could be no better demonstration of the intrinsic fluid-dynamic nature of the atomic nucleus! 100,000 different hypernuclei were generated in these recent experiments to test the weak force? Sorce Theory demonstrates that the weak force is no real force at all. It is a simple consequence of fluid-dynamic/wave-harmonic instability. The harmonic-resonance nature of the stabilization process in the formation of an atom is the reason that only certain harmonic nucleic energy configurations can remain stable and it is also the reason that hundreds of thousands of short-lived hyper-nucleic states can be produced.

A New Form of Matter! - Oh, It's Just a Fermionic Condensate

AIP: Physics News



Physics News 671, January 30, 2004

HALFWAY ACROSS ON THE BEC-BCS PRAIRIE. Researchers in Colorado have discovered a new form of atomic matter, a fermionic condensate unlike anything seen before. To approach this conceptually-difficult but physics-rich topic, we will proceed in several parts: providing a quantum background, defining the word "degeneracy," summarizing the new atomic state, and finally assessing the advantages of the new state. 1. Quantum background. In exploring the exotic landscape of quantum gases, physicists have lavished much attention on bosonic atoms (atoms whose total spin has an integer value, such as 0 or 1 or 2). In 1995 scientists succeeded in cooling (bosonic) atoms so that in a quantum sense the atoms began to overlap, at which point they really could not be distinguished and had, in effect, become part of a single quantum entity called Bose Einstein condensate (BEC). Fermions (possessing half-integer spins, such as 1/2 or 3/2 or 9/2), whether elementary particles like electrons and quarks, or whole atoms (and in determining whether an atom is a boson or fermion one has to add up the spins of all its constituent protons, neutrons, and electrons), do not act like bosons.


Comment: A BEC is simply a group of a certain class of atoms (bosons) which, when cooled, will possess relatively little intrinsic oscillatory motion. This is abstractly identified with the concept of “integer-spin” and in the case of atoms, it simply means that there is a fluid-dynamic, wave-harmonic balance of internal energies so that the inter-atomic oscillations in a normal sample of bosons are due mainly to thermal energy. When the sample is cooled the oscillations due normally to heat have ceased and the group moves as a whole because bosons do not possess much in the way of intrinsic oscillations. This is what a single quantum state actually is—the unification of inter-atomic motion. It is not some quantum-mystical disintegration of absolute atomic identity (though atoms are always part of a deeper fluid-dynamic continuum). The fact that the researchers do not understand quantum mechanisms and “collisionless fluid-dynamics”, and must resort to mystical mathematical concepts such as "Complementarity" and the "Uncertainty Principle", is why such "quantum" realms are so "conceptually difficult" to understand for the researchers suffering under the standard model.

continued…


The Pauli exclusion principle dictates that no two identical fermions may occupy the same quantum state. Most of chemistry here on Earth and elsewhere is dictated by the simple Pauli rule: electrons fill atomic orbitals in such a way that no two electrons have exactly the same quantum values.


Comment: Physical reality does not proceed by the dictation of human-derived Laws or principles. It works on causality, e.g. fluid-dynamics and wave-harmonics, of which the quantum researchers are quite ignorant. Pauli’s exclusion Principle is simply an accounting trick to help the researchers make valuable quantitative predictions in the absence of true physical/causal understanding.

continued…

…
New state of matter. Fermions, if you pair them, can become bosons. And in that way, fermions can enter pairwise into a quantum condensate. There are, however, a whole spectrum of pairing mechanisms. … The type of pairing can be adjusted by subtly altering the strength of an external magnetic field.


Comment: The concept of pairing, in this case (and especially in the case of “cooper-pairing”) is a gross oversimplification of the actual causal mechanisms. Configurations of intrinsically, harmonically unbalanced individual fermions can form new collective equilibrations which become fluid-dynamically balanced as they reach new equilibria (the details of this process are provided in the Sorce Theory books). The ad-hoc fine-tuning of the magnetic fields also helps in this process because a magnetic field can alter the internal resonances and thus the configurations of the harmonic resonance shells (electrons) of the atoms, thus enabling the researchers to achieve their harmonious equilibrium state and the resultant unification of inter-atomic oscillations without really understanding what they are doing.