The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.
I was not able to find any reference in the literature that gravitons might form the basis of an ether theory. I suspect this idea has not been rigorously examined because scientists in general do not consider that gravitons are physical entities that remain attached to the objects that create them. However, if gravitons have mass and remain connected to their source, then it becomes entirely possible that traveling transverse waves originating at source move along the string at high velocity. This forms the basis of VES ether theory.
Maxwell was able to calculate the speed of light using its electric and magnetic properties. This leads to the idea that a sea of graviton waves has its effect on the velocity of light by pushing on the photon’s electons and magnons. This also satisfies the requirement that gravitons influence the string cycles of photons and electrons, and a host of other observations.
The nature of the interaction is totally mechanical, wave against wave, which of course depends on a vast concentration of graviton waves traveling in all directions as already discussed. The waves are in intimate physical contact. For this reason a magnon, which is 299,792,459 times larger than an electon, would have proportional more graviton waves pushing against it. However, gravitons are pushing on 299,792,459 electons for every one magnon, which means magnons and electons are equally involved in the velocity of light and string cycles.
The interaction between graviton waves and a photon’s electon and magnon waves is dependent upon the photon’s string cycle. This is discussed in my next blog. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com
Tuesday, January 31, 2012
Monday, January 30, 2012
Ether (aether) theory articles
The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.
The following is a brief summary of some of the articles on ether theory and relativity, which I offer for your consideration.
P. Cornille (1996) published a paper in the Hadronic Journal (19, p215) entitled: “Does the ether exist?” He sums up his views as follows: “In this paper we review several experiments, including the Michelson-Morley experiment, in order to show that contrary to the usual textbook presentation of special relativity all these experiments are consistent with the existence of randomly fluctuating stationary ether.” VES theory fulfills this condition. Our galaxy is filled with a vast number of gravitons traveling more or less at random in all directions.
F. Goy (1996), in Foundations of Physics Letters (9, p165), stated: “In the last two decades, theories explaining the same experiments as well as special relativity does, were developed by using different synchronization procedures. All of them are ether-like theories. Most authors believe these theories to be equivalent to special relativity”.
H.P. Dart (1971) in Spectroscopy Letters (4, p29) had this to say about the various theories concerning light. “The ether-wave theory of light, suitably modified, is fully supported by all known evidence. Further observation and analysis will be required to determine which of its several forms accurately represents reality. On the other hand….the special theory of relativity is not supported by the evidence.”
F. Selleri (1994) in Frontiers of Fundamental Physics, Proceedings of an international Conference, (Sept. p181) summed up the situation this way: “In particular it will be shown that any modification of the coefficients of the Lorentz transformations, however small, gives rise to an ether theory…”. VES theory needs no modification of the Lorentz equation.
D. McCarthy (1993) in Galilean Electrodynamics (8, p116) pointed out the inconsistency between quantum electrodynamics and special relativity.
F. Winterberg (1988) in Zeitschrift fur Naturforschung (43A, 369) proposed “…ether is the cause of all relativistic effects, and for this reason is assumed to obey a non-relativistic equation of motion…” As we shall see, VES ether theory does obey a form of relativity but in a 3-dimensional world.
G. Spavieri (1988) in Foundation of Physics Letters (1, p387) pointed out “The origin of the equilibrium paradoxes of special relativity is analyzed.” “…inconsistency justifies the search for alternative theories such as the modern ether theories.”
N. Cherepkov (1980) in the Journal of Physics B (Atomic and Molecular Physics) (13, L 687) discusses spin polarization of photoelectrons ejected from outer subshells. He stated that “…in most cases the non-relativistic theory is capable of describing the polarization phenomena.”
R. Nedved, B.S. (1992) in Physics Essays (5, p153) stated: “The relativistic answer is insufficient because of the inconsistency between the Doppler relations and the LT relations.” LT is a reference to the Lorentz transformation.
B. Neganov (1991) in an article in the Hadronic Journal (14, p377) entitled “On the principle of relativity and its violation in the case of a spin precession of moving charge articles,” states: “It is found that in the case of a spin precession of particles moving along a curvilinear trajectory, the principle of relativity is violated up to the first order over the parameter v/c.”
R. Santilli (1996) in the Hadronic Journal (19, p41) pointed out that “The inapplicability of both the special and general relativities for interior dynamical problems is beyond credible doubts because of a truly impressive amount of physical evidence, such as: the impossibility of representing locally varying speeds of light, the inability to treat highly nonlinear, nonlocal and nonalgrangian systems, the transparent impossibility of representing interior orbits with continuously decaying angular momentum, gross inconsistencies occurring even in simple physical media…”.
H. Hayden (1995) in Physics Essays (8, p366) stated: “There is abundant evidence to show that SRT (special relativity theory) must, at the very least, engage in tortuous reasoning to explain some experimental results, among them stellar aberration (which in SRT depends upon relative velocity of Earth and star); the Sagnac and Michelson-Gale experiments; the Allen around-the-world Sagnac experiment; the Hafele-Keating experiment; the Brillet-Hall experiment; and the Champeney-Moon experiment.”
Stellar aberration of light occurs when two observers in motion on the Earth see a distant star from two different locations with respect to the line of motion. It was first described by Bradley in 1729 and is the oldest proof that Earth rotates around the Sun.
C. Whitney at Tufts University, (1994) pointed out in Galilean Electrodynamics (5, p98) that “Stellar aberration has been the subject of recent critiques of special relativity theory because of its apparent inconsistency with Doppler shifts. Careful analysis can remove this conflict. But the analysis requires unwelcome recourse to an unwanted coordinate frame reminiscent of absolute space. So even if reconciled with Doppler shifts, stellar aberration remains an embarrassment to special relativity theory.”
P. Naur (1999) in Physics Essays (12, p358) explained that prior to Einstein’s special theory of relativity, stellar aberration was explained by “waves in the ether.”
O. Jefimenko (1998) in Z. Naturforsch (53A, p977) had this to say: “The calculations presented in this paper show that some of the experiments allegedly proving the reality of length contraction and time dilation can be unambiguously interpreted as manifestations of velocity-dependent dynamical interactions taking place within the systems involved in the experiments rather than as manifestations of length contraction or time dilation.” This is precisely what VES ether theory does.
There are many other physicists who have expressed their disbelief in relativity that are not reported here, as well as those who believe in an ether theory. Some of these individuals are mentioned in the discussions that follow. I will now return to VES ether theory. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com
The following is a brief summary of some of the articles on ether theory and relativity, which I offer for your consideration.
P. Cornille (1996) published a paper in the Hadronic Journal (19, p215) entitled: “Does the ether exist?” He sums up his views as follows: “In this paper we review several experiments, including the Michelson-Morley experiment, in order to show that contrary to the usual textbook presentation of special relativity all these experiments are consistent with the existence of randomly fluctuating stationary ether.” VES theory fulfills this condition. Our galaxy is filled with a vast number of gravitons traveling more or less at random in all directions.
F. Goy (1996), in Foundations of Physics Letters (9, p165), stated: “In the last two decades, theories explaining the same experiments as well as special relativity does, were developed by using different synchronization procedures. All of them are ether-like theories. Most authors believe these theories to be equivalent to special relativity”.
H.P. Dart (1971) in Spectroscopy Letters (4, p29) had this to say about the various theories concerning light. “The ether-wave theory of light, suitably modified, is fully supported by all known evidence. Further observation and analysis will be required to determine which of its several forms accurately represents reality. On the other hand….the special theory of relativity is not supported by the evidence.”
F. Selleri (1994) in Frontiers of Fundamental Physics, Proceedings of an international Conference, (Sept. p181) summed up the situation this way: “In particular it will be shown that any modification of the coefficients of the Lorentz transformations, however small, gives rise to an ether theory…”. VES theory needs no modification of the Lorentz equation.
D. McCarthy (1993) in Galilean Electrodynamics (8, p116) pointed out the inconsistency between quantum electrodynamics and special relativity.
F. Winterberg (1988) in Zeitschrift fur Naturforschung (43A, 369) proposed “…ether is the cause of all relativistic effects, and for this reason is assumed to obey a non-relativistic equation of motion…” As we shall see, VES ether theory does obey a form of relativity but in a 3-dimensional world.
G. Spavieri (1988) in Foundation of Physics Letters (1, p387) pointed out “The origin of the equilibrium paradoxes of special relativity is analyzed.” “…inconsistency justifies the search for alternative theories such as the modern ether theories.”
N. Cherepkov (1980) in the Journal of Physics B (Atomic and Molecular Physics) (13, L 687) discusses spin polarization of photoelectrons ejected from outer subshells. He stated that “…in most cases the non-relativistic theory is capable of describing the polarization phenomena.”
R. Nedved, B.S. (1992) in Physics Essays (5, p153) stated: “The relativistic answer is insufficient because of the inconsistency between the Doppler relations and the LT relations.” LT is a reference to the Lorentz transformation.
B. Neganov (1991) in an article in the Hadronic Journal (14, p377) entitled “On the principle of relativity and its violation in the case of a spin precession of moving charge articles,” states: “It is found that in the case of a spin precession of particles moving along a curvilinear trajectory, the principle of relativity is violated up to the first order over the parameter v/c.”
R. Santilli (1996) in the Hadronic Journal (19, p41) pointed out that “The inapplicability of both the special and general relativities for interior dynamical problems is beyond credible doubts because of a truly impressive amount of physical evidence, such as: the impossibility of representing locally varying speeds of light, the inability to treat highly nonlinear, nonlocal and nonalgrangian systems, the transparent impossibility of representing interior orbits with continuously decaying angular momentum, gross inconsistencies occurring even in simple physical media…”.
H. Hayden (1995) in Physics Essays (8, p366) stated: “There is abundant evidence to show that SRT (special relativity theory) must, at the very least, engage in tortuous reasoning to explain some experimental results, among them stellar aberration (which in SRT depends upon relative velocity of Earth and star); the Sagnac and Michelson-Gale experiments; the Allen around-the-world Sagnac experiment; the Hafele-Keating experiment; the Brillet-Hall experiment; and the Champeney-Moon experiment.”
Stellar aberration of light occurs when two observers in motion on the Earth see a distant star from two different locations with respect to the line of motion. It was first described by Bradley in 1729 and is the oldest proof that Earth rotates around the Sun.
C. Whitney at Tufts University, (1994) pointed out in Galilean Electrodynamics (5, p98) that “Stellar aberration has been the subject of recent critiques of special relativity theory because of its apparent inconsistency with Doppler shifts. Careful analysis can remove this conflict. But the analysis requires unwelcome recourse to an unwanted coordinate frame reminiscent of absolute space. So even if reconciled with Doppler shifts, stellar aberration remains an embarrassment to special relativity theory.”
P. Naur (1999) in Physics Essays (12, p358) explained that prior to Einstein’s special theory of relativity, stellar aberration was explained by “waves in the ether.”
O. Jefimenko (1998) in Z. Naturforsch (53A, p977) had this to say: “The calculations presented in this paper show that some of the experiments allegedly proving the reality of length contraction and time dilation can be unambiguously interpreted as manifestations of velocity-dependent dynamical interactions taking place within the systems involved in the experiments rather than as manifestations of length contraction or time dilation.” This is precisely what VES ether theory does.
There are many other physicists who have expressed their disbelief in relativity that are not reported here, as well as those who believe in an ether theory. Some of these individuals are mentioned in the discussions that follow. I will now return to VES ether theory. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com
Sunday, January 29, 2012
VES ether theory (Virtual Elastic String ether theory)
The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.
Not long after I realized that gravitons might influence string cycles and modulate the velocity of light, I discovered that a large number of scientist over many decades have insisted that an ether theory (also spelled aether) would replace the need to believe that relativity is due to a four dimensional world. It was apparent that this portion of elastic string theory was a form of ether theory.
According to modern day ether theory, there are waves in the space that surrounds us that are responsible for a number of observations attributed to special relativity. Asimov in his physics book published in 1966 made this point: The substance carrying the wave had to be solid; it could not be a gas—all the parts had to be interconnected. Elastic graviton strings fits this idea beautifully. A graviton is composed of matter, with mass, and it is stretched across galaxies.
Over the decades, a large number of individuals have published articles insisting that ether theory completely replaces the need to believe in the special theory of relativity. I found it interesting that Lorentz believed in an ether theory. In other words, he felt there were waves in the ether that maintained the velocity of light at 299,792,459 meters per second in the Michelson-Morley experiment, not shrinkage of the instrument as dictated by his equation (to be explained in a future blog).
Before I continue on with my VES ether model I will review some of the articles devoted to ether theory. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com
Not long after I realized that gravitons might influence string cycles and modulate the velocity of light, I discovered that a large number of scientist over many decades have insisted that an ether theory (also spelled aether) would replace the need to believe that relativity is due to a four dimensional world. It was apparent that this portion of elastic string theory was a form of ether theory.
According to modern day ether theory, there are waves in the space that surrounds us that are responsible for a number of observations attributed to special relativity. Asimov in his physics book published in 1966 made this point: The substance carrying the wave had to be solid; it could not be a gas—all the parts had to be interconnected. Elastic graviton strings fits this idea beautifully. A graviton is composed of matter, with mass, and it is stretched across galaxies.
Over the decades, a large number of individuals have published articles insisting that ether theory completely replaces the need to believe in the special theory of relativity. I found it interesting that Lorentz believed in an ether theory. In other words, he felt there were waves in the ether that maintained the velocity of light at 299,792,459 meters per second in the Michelson-Morley experiment, not shrinkage of the instrument as dictated by his equation (to be explained in a future blog).
Before I continue on with my VES ether model I will review some of the articles devoted to ether theory. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com
Saturday, January 28, 2012
Shape of elastic string waves
The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.
In their physics book published in 1981, Halliday and Resnick provide drawings of traveling transverse waves for a common string. They point out that the string’s elastic properties are responsible for the waves. The shape of the pulse created is similar to that shown in the following illustration.
Experiments have shown that the pulse does not change its shape as it moves along the string, and it will continue indefinitely if there are no internal frictional losses. This is exactly what we should expect for gravitons because gravitons have perfect elasticity and perfect cohesiveness.
A physical disturbance on the electron sends moving transverse waves along the string. The waves have small amplitudes and move with great velocity. This allows moving transverse graviton waves to transfer energy to other subatomic particles. In the blogs that follow, I will present a model to show how graviton waves provide the energy needed to explain the effect of gravitons on string cycles and their affect on moving subatomic particles. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com
In their physics book published in 1981, Halliday and Resnick provide drawings of traveling transverse waves for a common string. They point out that the string’s elastic properties are responsible for the waves. The shape of the pulse created is similar to that shown in the following illustration.
Experiments have shown that the pulse does not change its shape as it moves along the string, and it will continue indefinitely if there are no internal frictional losses. This is exactly what we should expect for gravitons because gravitons have perfect elasticity and perfect cohesiveness.
A physical disturbance on the electron sends moving transverse waves along the string. The waves have small amplitudes and move with great velocity. This allows moving transverse graviton waves to transfer energy to other subatomic particles. In the blogs that follow, I will present a model to show how graviton waves provide the energy needed to explain the effect of gravitons on string cycles and their affect on moving subatomic particles. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com
Friday, January 27, 2012
Portals create string waves
The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.
Virtual particles are ejected through portals one at a time until a full complement of strings is created. Thus a portal for gravitons may at any one time hold a fairly large number of strings that remain bound to their source. This means every time the portal opens and snaps shut it will create a physical disturbance on the string that will cause a wave with small amplitude to travel away from its source.
Because the waves are created by the opening and closing of portals, it means that magnon and electon strings also have traveling transverse waves, and the frequency of the waves is the same for all strings since all portals likely make the same number of strings in the same time frame.
In the next blog, I will review the shape of the waves. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com
Virtual particles are ejected through portals one at a time until a full complement of strings is created. Thus a portal for gravitons may at any one time hold a fairly large number of strings that remain bound to their source. This means every time the portal opens and snaps shut it will create a physical disturbance on the string that will cause a wave with small amplitude to travel away from its source.
Because the waves are created by the opening and closing of portals, it means that magnon and electon strings also have traveling transverse waves, and the frequency of the waves is the same for all strings since all portals likely make the same number of strings in the same time frame.
In the next blog, I will review the shape of the waves. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com
Thursday, January 26, 2012
Energy in a sea of graviton waves
The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.
The question is what is their in the vast space around us that provides a source of energy that modulates the velocity of photons and electrons, and modifies the string cycles of these particles. The obvious candidate is gravitons as mentioned in the previous blog. To accomplish this task:
• There must be a vast concentration of gravitons in the space about us—a veritable sea of gravitons.
• Gravitons must transmit energy in the form of transverse traveling waves.
• Graviton waves must transfer energy to the electons and magnons associated with subatomic particles; i.e. photons, electrons, and quarks.
I previously discussed the idea that photons and electrons might make as many as 29,979,245,900 electons (about 10^10) in every string cycle. Because these strings have virtual properties, they only last for a brief period of time. If the string cycle frequency of the particle is in the neighborhood of 10^15 per second, then it must make and retract 10^10 electons in this period of time. Now, if we assume that the same number of gravitons are made in one string cycle, but exist for a full second, then a single electron, photon, or quark would contribute 10^25 gravitons to the space about the particle at any one time. This number is again magnified because all the stars and planets in our solar system, and all the stars and planets in our local cluster of galaxies contribute to the sea of gravitons surrounding Earth. This huge number forms a dense fabric of elastic strings that occupy the ether about us. This is not true for electons, magnons, and gluons because they only extend a limited distance in space, and they only exist for a very brief period of time. For this reason, we can expect graviton density to be at least 10^15 times greater than electon density, and 10^25 times greater than magnon density.
The concentration of gravitons varies greatly. For example, gravitons emanating from Earth are about 1000 fold greater at Earth’s surface than the concentration of gravitons arriving here from our Sun, and even fewer gravitons are contributed by the Milky Way Galaxy. However, the number of gravitons arriving here from outer space is huge even if Earth’s gravitons overshadow them. We can say without doubt, there is a sea of gravitons oriented in all directions forming a dense fabric in space. I believe this is why I was able to show that a spinning table tennis ball continues to curve in a vacuum.
n my next blog, I will discuss graviton waves. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com
The question is what is their in the vast space around us that provides a source of energy that modulates the velocity of photons and electrons, and modifies the string cycles of these particles. The obvious candidate is gravitons as mentioned in the previous blog. To accomplish this task:
• There must be a vast concentration of gravitons in the space about us—a veritable sea of gravitons.
• Gravitons must transmit energy in the form of transverse traveling waves.
• Graviton waves must transfer energy to the electons and magnons associated with subatomic particles; i.e. photons, electrons, and quarks.
I previously discussed the idea that photons and electrons might make as many as 29,979,245,900 electons (about 10^10) in every string cycle. Because these strings have virtual properties, they only last for a brief period of time. If the string cycle frequency of the particle is in the neighborhood of 10^15 per second, then it must make and retract 10^10 electons in this period of time. Now, if we assume that the same number of gravitons are made in one string cycle, but exist for a full second, then a single electron, photon, or quark would contribute 10^25 gravitons to the space about the particle at any one time. This number is again magnified because all the stars and planets in our solar system, and all the stars and planets in our local cluster of galaxies contribute to the sea of gravitons surrounding Earth. This huge number forms a dense fabric of elastic strings that occupy the ether about us. This is not true for electons, magnons, and gluons because they only extend a limited distance in space, and they only exist for a very brief period of time. For this reason, we can expect graviton density to be at least 10^15 times greater than electon density, and 10^25 times greater than magnon density.
The concentration of gravitons varies greatly. For example, gravitons emanating from Earth are about 1000 fold greater at Earth’s surface than the concentration of gravitons arriving here from our Sun, and even fewer gravitons are contributed by the Milky Way Galaxy. However, the number of gravitons arriving here from outer space is huge even if Earth’s gravitons overshadow them. We can say without doubt, there is a sea of gravitons oriented in all directions forming a dense fabric in space. I believe this is why I was able to show that a spinning table tennis ball continues to curve in a vacuum.
n my next blog, I will discuss graviton waves. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com
Wednesday, January 25, 2012
A source of energy is a good thing
The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.
In addition to the effect of gravitational fields on elastic string frequency, there are a number of other important observations related to this subject that I will simply list here:
• The speed of light appears to be invariant.
• It requires more energy than expected to increase the velocity of electrons in particle accelerators.
• Radioactive particles in particle accelerators emit less radiation than expected.
• Atomic clocks run slower when moving.
• Maxwell calculated the speed of light using its electric and magnetic properties.
• Electrons in orbit never spiral into protons.
It is obvious that a unique source of energy is needed to account for these observations.
• The energy source must account for the behavior of electrons and radioactive particles in particle accelerators.
• The energy source much act in concert with magnons and electons to satisfy Maxwell’s equations.
• The energy source must be capable of modifying atomic clocks.
• The energy source must be capable of modifying radioactive particle emission.
• The energy source must be associated with gravitons because gravitational fields influence (1) the string cycles of photons in flight, (2) emission by radioactive particles, (3) keeping time by atomic clocks, and (4) the size of the photon created by atoms.
I will continue with this discussion in my next blog. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com
In addition to the effect of gravitational fields on elastic string frequency, there are a number of other important observations related to this subject that I will simply list here:
• The speed of light appears to be invariant.
• It requires more energy than expected to increase the velocity of electrons in particle accelerators.
• Radioactive particles in particle accelerators emit less radiation than expected.
• Atomic clocks run slower when moving.
• Maxwell calculated the speed of light using its electric and magnetic properties.
• Electrons in orbit never spiral into protons.
It is obvious that a unique source of energy is needed to account for these observations.
• The energy source must account for the behavior of electrons and radioactive particles in particle accelerators.
• The energy source much act in concert with magnons and electons to satisfy Maxwell’s equations.
• The energy source must be capable of modifying atomic clocks.
• The energy source must be capable of modifying radioactive particle emission.
• The energy source must be associated with gravitons because gravitational fields influence (1) the string cycles of photons in flight, (2) emission by radioactive particles, (3) keeping time by atomic clocks, and (4) the size of the photon created by atoms.
I will continue with this discussion in my next blog. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com
Tuesday, January 24, 2012
Gravitons influence string cycles
The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.
There are several important observations that show gravitational fields affect photons, atomic clocks, and radioactive particles. I will briefly summarize these observations here; then take them up in more detail in future blogs.
Gravitational red shift: Photons received here on Earth from dense stars with high gravitational fields have lower oscillation frequencies than expected. Physicists refer to this as a gravitation red shift because red is the lowest frequency of visible light.
Gravitational frequency shift: Physicists have shown that cesium atomic clocks tick slower in stronger gravitational fields; thus the oscillation frequency of the atom slows down. Physicists refer to this red shift as a gravitational frequency shift.
Radioactive particle emission: Physicists have shown that radioactive particles emit less radiation in stronger gravitational fields. This can be accounted for if the string cycle frequency is lower.
Photons traveling through a strong gravitational field have lower oscillation frequency, which is another form of gravitational frequency shift; although here, we must take into account the movement of the photon.
These observations prove dramatically that gravitons influence the creation of photons and modify their oscillation frequency. These experiments also prove that gravitons affect the emission of radioactive particles and the rate cesium atomic clocks tick per second. These observations can all be accounted for if gravitons influence the string cycles of electrons, photons, and quarks. Just how this is accomplished is taken up in future blogs. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com
There are several important observations that show gravitational fields affect photons, atomic clocks, and radioactive particles. I will briefly summarize these observations here; then take them up in more detail in future blogs.
Gravitational red shift: Photons received here on Earth from dense stars with high gravitational fields have lower oscillation frequencies than expected. Physicists refer to this as a gravitation red shift because red is the lowest frequency of visible light.
Gravitational frequency shift: Physicists have shown that cesium atomic clocks tick slower in stronger gravitational fields; thus the oscillation frequency of the atom slows down. Physicists refer to this red shift as a gravitational frequency shift.
Radioactive particle emission: Physicists have shown that radioactive particles emit less radiation in stronger gravitational fields. This can be accounted for if the string cycle frequency is lower.
Photons traveling through a strong gravitational field have lower oscillation frequency, which is another form of gravitational frequency shift; although here, we must take into account the movement of the photon.
These observations prove dramatically that gravitons influence the creation of photons and modify their oscillation frequency. These experiments also prove that gravitons affect the emission of radioactive particles and the rate cesium atomic clocks tick per second. These observations can all be accounted for if gravitons influence the string cycles of electrons, photons, and quarks. Just how this is accomplished is taken up in future blogs. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com
Monday, January 23, 2012
Gravitons influence string cycles and the velocity of electrons and photons
The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.
In previous blogs, I explained how gravitons emanating from the Sun affect the spin and orbital patterns of planets, not only because of their gravitational force of attraction, but because solar bodies must plow through a vast number of these physical strings in space that remain attached to their source. Now, in the next series of blogs, I will explain how a sea of gravitons modifies string cycles and the velocity of subatomic particles.
• The evidence is clear that graviton concentration is correlated with the rate atoms and subatomic particles go through their string cycles.
• The evidence is clear that gravitons influence the velocity of subatomic particles, which explains relativity and the invariant nature of the speed of light.
I will begin this discussion with the first proposition. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com
In previous blogs, I explained how gravitons emanating from the Sun affect the spin and orbital patterns of planets, not only because of their gravitational force of attraction, but because solar bodies must plow through a vast number of these physical strings in space that remain attached to their source. Now, in the next series of blogs, I will explain how a sea of gravitons modifies string cycles and the velocity of subatomic particles.
• The evidence is clear that graviton concentration is correlated with the rate atoms and subatomic particles go through their string cycles.
• The evidence is clear that gravitons influence the velocity of subatomic particles, which explains relativity and the invariant nature of the speed of light.
I will begin this discussion with the first proposition. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com
Sunday, January 22, 2012
Reflection of light
The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D
When light shines on the surface of a lake, a portion of the photons enters the water where their paths are bent by refraction. Another portion of the light is reflected off the surface of the lake. If the photon’s virtual particles are ejected down into the lake as water and photon meet, it will cause the photon to enter the water where it will be bent as discussed under refraction. If the photon’s elastic strings are in the same plane as the water surface, the photon will be reflected into space. This causes the reflected photons to be polarized.
The momentum of a visible light photon is 100 billion times greater than a radio wave photon. For this reason, a visible light photon striking a hard, non-polished surface reacts more to the immediate angle it encounters rather than the total surface angle. In contrast, the radio wave will be more influenced by its strings that are strung out across the uneven surface. For this reason, the angle of reflection will be more nearly like the plane of the whole surface.
In the next series of blogs, I will explain how gravitons affect string cycles and the velocity of electrons and photons. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com
When light shines on the surface of a lake, a portion of the photons enters the water where their paths are bent by refraction. Another portion of the light is reflected off the surface of the lake. If the photon’s virtual particles are ejected down into the lake as water and photon meet, it will cause the photon to enter the water where it will be bent as discussed under refraction. If the photon’s elastic strings are in the same plane as the water surface, the photon will be reflected into space. This causes the reflected photons to be polarized.
The momentum of a visible light photon is 100 billion times greater than a radio wave photon. For this reason, a visible light photon striking a hard, non-polished surface reacts more to the immediate angle it encounters rather than the total surface angle. In contrast, the radio wave will be more influenced by its strings that are strung out across the uneven surface. For this reason, the angle of reflection will be more nearly like the plane of the whole surface.
In the next series of blogs, I will explain how gravitons affect string cycles and the velocity of electrons and photons. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com
Saturday, January 21, 2012
Polarization of light
The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.
Light is polarized when all the electons emanating from photons are oriented in the same direction as depicted in the next illustration.
The two photons are polarized because their electons are oriented in the same plane. There are no electon virtual particles shot toward the viewer nor directly away from the viewer.
If the electons are in the same plane as shown, it is equally true that magnons are also in the same plane, but at a 90 degree angle to the electon plane. Thus they will be either directed toward the viewer or away from the viewer.
Polarization of light can be achieved by shining light through a crystal. Polarization can be so complete that when a second crystal is oriented 90 degrees to the first, the polarized light can not pass through the second crystal.
In the next blog, I will discuss how elastic strings influence reflection of photons off shiny surfaces. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com
Light is polarized when all the electons emanating from photons are oriented in the same direction as depicted in the next illustration.
The two photons are polarized because their electons are oriented in the same plane. There are no electon virtual particles shot toward the viewer nor directly away from the viewer.
If the electons are in the same plane as shown, it is equally true that magnons are also in the same plane, but at a 90 degree angle to the electon plane. Thus they will be either directed toward the viewer or away from the viewer.
Polarization of light can be achieved by shining light through a crystal. Polarization can be so complete that when a second crystal is oriented 90 degrees to the first, the polarized light can not pass through the second crystal.
In the next blog, I will discuss how elastic strings influence reflection of photons off shiny surfaces. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com
Friday, January 20, 2012
Photon fields can cancel or reinforce
The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.
A group of photons can have their elastic string cycles in synchrony or out of synchrony. When they are in complete synchrony, the strengths of the electon fields increase because they are all contributing to the number of free e-electons and free p-electons in the same time frame. We see this as in increase in the amplitude of the wave as depicted in the next illustration.
When photons are completely out of synchrony, the p-electons on one photon bind to the e-electons on the other photon. Cancellation occurs because our instruments cannot detect bonded complementary electons. This is shown in the following illustration.
Of course, partial cancellation occurs if photons are only partly out of synchrony.
This observation clearly demonstrates why it is possible that a single photon can be making two units of p-electons and one unit of e-electons in the same time frame; yet, our instruments can only detect one unit of p-electons.
In the next blog, I will explain how elastic strings cause the polarization of light. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com
A group of photons can have their elastic string cycles in synchrony or out of synchrony. When they are in complete synchrony, the strengths of the electon fields increase because they are all contributing to the number of free e-electons and free p-electons in the same time frame. We see this as in increase in the amplitude of the wave as depicted in the next illustration.
When photons are completely out of synchrony, the p-electons on one photon bind to the e-electons on the other photon. Cancellation occurs because our instruments cannot detect bonded complementary electons. This is shown in the following illustration.
Of course, partial cancellation occurs if photons are only partly out of synchrony.
This observation clearly demonstrates why it is possible that a single photon can be making two units of p-electons and one unit of e-electons in the same time frame; yet, our instruments can only detect one unit of p-electons.
In the next blog, I will explain how elastic strings cause the polarization of light. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com
Thursday, January 19, 2012
Photons change direction when they enter glass
The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.
When a photon leaves the air and enters a denser medium at an angle, the flight path of the photon changes direction. A fish at the bottom of a pool is deeper than it appears, and in the same manner, light that enters glass at an angle is deflected. This is depicted in the following illustration.
A photon changes its flight path because its elastic strings are ejected at 90 degrees to its line of flight. Those strings that penetrate the glass will cause the photon to pivot and change their flight direction. A photon is not a simple wave oriented in just one plane; it is more like a fuzz ball with respect to its strings, which means more often than not elastic strings will penetrate the glass and cause it to pivot. The same considerations apply when the photon exits glass, only now the strings cause the photon to return to its original line of flight.
Visible white light from our Sun is composed of photons of many different frequencies. When this light is passed through a prism, it reveals the true composition of the light. Scientists have shown that blue light bends more when going through a glass prism than red light. This is shown in the following illustration.
Red light has the lowest oscillation frequency of all visible light, while blue light has one of the highest with almost twice the frequency of red light. This means at that critical point when light first enters the prism, photons that make up blue light create anchor points faster than red photons. On average blue photons will be curving twice as soon as the red photons, which will cause the separation of photons of different frequency.
In the next blog, we will see how elastic strings explain reinforcement and interference. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com
When a photon leaves the air and enters a denser medium at an angle, the flight path of the photon changes direction. A fish at the bottom of a pool is deeper than it appears, and in the same manner, light that enters glass at an angle is deflected. This is depicted in the following illustration.
A photon changes its flight path because its elastic strings are ejected at 90 degrees to its line of flight. Those strings that penetrate the glass will cause the photon to pivot and change their flight direction. A photon is not a simple wave oriented in just one plane; it is more like a fuzz ball with respect to its strings, which means more often than not elastic strings will penetrate the glass and cause it to pivot. The same considerations apply when the photon exits glass, only now the strings cause the photon to return to its original line of flight.
Visible white light from our Sun is composed of photons of many different frequencies. When this light is passed through a prism, it reveals the true composition of the light. Scientists have shown that blue light bends more when going through a glass prism than red light. This is shown in the following illustration.
Red light has the lowest oscillation frequency of all visible light, while blue light has one of the highest with almost twice the frequency of red light. This means at that critical point when light first enters the prism, photons that make up blue light create anchor points faster than red photons. On average blue photons will be curving twice as soon as the red photons, which will cause the separation of photons of different frequency.
In the next blog, we will see how elastic strings explain reinforcement and interference. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com
Wednesday, January 18, 2012
Photons bend around objects
The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.
Although there is a great deal of evidence proving photons are particles, there is equally valid, strong evidence that photons have wave properties. The particle-wave duality of photons and electrons has sparked much debate for more than 300 years; however, elastic string theory easily explains particle-wave duality. Let’s begin this discussion with diffraction.
The observation that photons bend around solid objects is called diffraction. It was first observed by Grimaldi, an Italian scientist, in 1665.
According to elastic string theory, the photon’s magnetic fields are composed of magnons that are ejected at right angles to the photon’s line of flight, and the electric fields are composed of electons that are also ejected at right angles to the photon’s line of flight. It is also true that magnons and electons are ejected at right angles to each other.
The elastic strings have physical properties; i.e. they have mass.
Imagine a photon traveling past a thin wall as shown in the following illustration.
If electons are the strings striking the wall, the orientation of magnons will be up or down, which means they will have no bearing on the deflection of the photon. The opposite is true if magnons strike the wall. However, since the total mass is the same for each, the photon will be deflected the same either way.
Scientists have frequently studied the deflection of photons using slit experiments. In this case, the photons are directed through a thin slit and deflection is observed as the photons pass the wall. This is shown in the following picture, which was taken from Wikipedia.
In this single slit experiment, those photons whose strings strike the barrier on the left are diverted left, while those photons whose strings strike the right side of the slit are deflected to the right. This reasoning explains all slit experiments that show photons and electrons have wave properties. When the width of the slit is extended, only photons passing near the barrier are deflected.
A radio wave photon is bent more than a photon of visible light when it passes by an obstruction because a photon of visible light has 100 billion times more momentum than a radio wave photon. However, both will be deflected to some degree. This observation provides another convincing line of evidence that photons in flight have mass, just as their strings must have mass.
It is true that all elastic strings tend to be swept to the rear as they pass through a field of gravitons crisscrossing in all directions. In most cases the concentration of the graviton field is uniform, which allows a photon to travel a straight path. It must be that a solid wall deflects a photon faster than the matrix of gravitons otherwise the photon would not curve as shown.
Diffraction experiments clearly support elastic string theory.
In the next blog, we will take up another mechanism for changing the flight path of a photon that involves its wave properties. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com
Although there is a great deal of evidence proving photons are particles, there is equally valid, strong evidence that photons have wave properties. The particle-wave duality of photons and electrons has sparked much debate for more than 300 years; however, elastic string theory easily explains particle-wave duality. Let’s begin this discussion with diffraction.
The observation that photons bend around solid objects is called diffraction. It was first observed by Grimaldi, an Italian scientist, in 1665.
According to elastic string theory, the photon’s magnetic fields are composed of magnons that are ejected at right angles to the photon’s line of flight, and the electric fields are composed of electons that are also ejected at right angles to the photon’s line of flight. It is also true that magnons and electons are ejected at right angles to each other.
The elastic strings have physical properties; i.e. they have mass.
Imagine a photon traveling past a thin wall as shown in the following illustration.
If electons are the strings striking the wall, the orientation of magnons will be up or down, which means they will have no bearing on the deflection of the photon. The opposite is true if magnons strike the wall. However, since the total mass is the same for each, the photon will be deflected the same either way.
Scientists have frequently studied the deflection of photons using slit experiments. In this case, the photons are directed through a thin slit and deflection is observed as the photons pass the wall. This is shown in the following picture, which was taken from Wikipedia.
In this single slit experiment, those photons whose strings strike the barrier on the left are diverted left, while those photons whose strings strike the right side of the slit are deflected to the right. This reasoning explains all slit experiments that show photons and electrons have wave properties. When the width of the slit is extended, only photons passing near the barrier are deflected.
A radio wave photon is bent more than a photon of visible light when it passes by an obstruction because a photon of visible light has 100 billion times more momentum than a radio wave photon. However, both will be deflected to some degree. This observation provides another convincing line of evidence that photons in flight have mass, just as their strings must have mass.
It is true that all elastic strings tend to be swept to the rear as they pass through a field of gravitons crisscrossing in all directions. In most cases the concentration of the graviton field is uniform, which allows a photon to travel a straight path. It must be that a solid wall deflects a photon faster than the matrix of gravitons otherwise the photon would not curve as shown.
Diffraction experiments clearly support elastic string theory.
In the next blog, we will take up another mechanism for changing the flight path of a photon that involves its wave properties. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com
Tuesday, January 17, 2012
Portals alternate making strings.
The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.
My model for the photon shows it is composed of two spheres separated by retracting gravitons. My model also dictates the following:
• A photon has at least three magnon portals on each sphere as shown in the illustration.
• A photon has 299,792,459 electon portals for every magnon portal
• The retraction of elastic strings by a photon requires more than ½ of string cycle.
• If a portal is still retracting strings, it cannot eject strings at the same time.
Magnon portals #2 and #3 on the orange sphere are not creating any new strings because their strings have not completely retracted from the previous cycle. The same is true for portal #3 on the green sphere.
The two #1 portals create 100 n-magnons and 100 s-magnons that become bound as complementary strings. The strings are distributed at random around the photon because the photon is spinning rapidly on its axis. As they retract, they put great pressure on the outside of the photon.
In the next string cycle, the reverse occurs. #3 portals will be creating the 100 pairs of retracting bound complementary magnons, and the #2 orange portal will be ejecting free strings. All of the other portals will be preoccupied with retracting strings.
What is true for magnons is equally true for electons only in this case there are 299,792,459 electon portals for every magnon portal. At the time the #2 portal on the green sphere is making 100 free magnons, there are 299,792,459 electon portals on the orange sphere and each is making 100 free electons. The mass and energy of the free electons is exactly equal to the mass and energy of the free magnons. In addition to free electons, the photon has 299,792,459 electon portals on one sphere creating e-electons and the same number on the orange sphere creating p-electons; the strings created become bound as complementary strings. They too are distributing at random on the surface of the photon. As they retract back to their portals they exert great pressure on the surface of the photon. Magnons and electons are equally responsible for constricting the photon, which means they are equally responsible for inducing a new round of strings.
I will now turn the subject to the wave properties of photons. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com
My model for the photon shows it is composed of two spheres separated by retracting gravitons. My model also dictates the following:
• A photon has at least three magnon portals on each sphere as shown in the illustration.
• A photon has 299,792,459 electon portals for every magnon portal
• The retraction of elastic strings by a photon requires more than ½ of string cycle.
• If a portal is still retracting strings, it cannot eject strings at the same time.
Magnon portals #2 and #3 on the orange sphere are not creating any new strings because their strings have not completely retracted from the previous cycle. The same is true for portal #3 on the green sphere.
The two #1 portals create 100 n-magnons and 100 s-magnons that become bound as complementary strings. The strings are distributed at random around the photon because the photon is spinning rapidly on its axis. As they retract, they put great pressure on the outside of the photon.
In the next string cycle, the reverse occurs. #3 portals will be creating the 100 pairs of retracting bound complementary magnons, and the #2 orange portal will be ejecting free strings. All of the other portals will be preoccupied with retracting strings.
What is true for magnons is equally true for electons only in this case there are 299,792,459 electon portals for every magnon portal. At the time the #2 portal on the green sphere is making 100 free magnons, there are 299,792,459 electon portals on the orange sphere and each is making 100 free electons. The mass and energy of the free electons is exactly equal to the mass and energy of the free magnons. In addition to free electons, the photon has 299,792,459 electon portals on one sphere creating e-electons and the same number on the orange sphere creating p-electons; the strings created become bound as complementary strings. They too are distributing at random on the surface of the photon. As they retract back to their portals they exert great pressure on the surface of the photon. Magnons and electons are equally responsible for constricting the photon, which means they are equally responsible for inducing a new round of strings.
I will now turn the subject to the wave properties of photons. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com
Monday, January 16, 2012
The size of string portals
The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.
The virtual particle that is to become an elastic string is ejected through a portal. My model suggests there are unique portals for magnons, electons, and gravitons.
An examination of the photon’s string cycle shows that strings are made in stages until a full complement of strings is created during one string cycle. We know 299,792,459 electons are created for every magnon during one cycle. If the photon creates 100 free n-magnons (one unit) during one string cycle, it could do so by using just one portal for n-magnons, located on the sphere composed of n-goo. The n-magnon portal would eject one n-magnon virtual particle at a time until all 100 had been ejected. For every n-magnon portal there would be 299,792,459 electon portals on the other sphere. Each portal would eject 100 electon virtual particles in the same time frame needed for one magnon portal to eject 100 magnons. For ease in discussion, one unit of electons would be equivalent to 29,979,245,900 electons. The electons ejected from one sphere would have the same mass and energy as the magnons ejected from the other sphere. The two spheres would be in balance.
Although the number of electon portals contemplated is large, each portal is extremely small compared to a magnon portal; in fact, the size of the portal opening for one magnon is the same as the combined area of 299,792,459 electon portals. It is envisioned that e-electon portals are distributed at random on one sphere, and p-electon portals are distributed at random on the other sphere. Because photons are very large compared to virtual particles, there is plenty of room for a large number of portals even on a small radio wave photon.
Gravitons would have their own unique portals that arise at the center between the two spheres. Each graviton is composed of n-goo and s-goo in random fashion that makes each graviton unique. This feature does not allow them to bind and create a force of attraction, nor does it permit them to bind and create a force of repulsion. Gravitons are thought to be much smaller than any other string, and consequently their portals are that much smaller. I will take this subject up again at a later date.
The model holds that in one string cycle, one sphere is making two units of n-magnons and one unit of p-electons, and the other sphere is making one unit of s-magnons and two units of e-electons. This suggests that retraction and integration of magnon and electon strings into primordial goo takes longer than one half of a string cycle. This is the subject of my next blog. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com
The virtual particle that is to become an elastic string is ejected through a portal. My model suggests there are unique portals for magnons, electons, and gravitons.
An examination of the photon’s string cycle shows that strings are made in stages until a full complement of strings is created during one string cycle. We know 299,792,459 electons are created for every magnon during one cycle. If the photon creates 100 free n-magnons (one unit) during one string cycle, it could do so by using just one portal for n-magnons, located on the sphere composed of n-goo. The n-magnon portal would eject one n-magnon virtual particle at a time until all 100 had been ejected. For every n-magnon portal there would be 299,792,459 electon portals on the other sphere. Each portal would eject 100 electon virtual particles in the same time frame needed for one magnon portal to eject 100 magnons. For ease in discussion, one unit of electons would be equivalent to 29,979,245,900 electons. The electons ejected from one sphere would have the same mass and energy as the magnons ejected from the other sphere. The two spheres would be in balance.
Although the number of electon portals contemplated is large, each portal is extremely small compared to a magnon portal; in fact, the size of the portal opening for one magnon is the same as the combined area of 299,792,459 electon portals. It is envisioned that e-electon portals are distributed at random on one sphere, and p-electon portals are distributed at random on the other sphere. Because photons are very large compared to virtual particles, there is plenty of room for a large number of portals even on a small radio wave photon.
Gravitons would have their own unique portals that arise at the center between the two spheres. Each graviton is composed of n-goo and s-goo in random fashion that makes each graviton unique. This feature does not allow them to bind and create a force of attraction, nor does it permit them to bind and create a force of repulsion. Gravitons are thought to be much smaller than any other string, and consequently their portals are that much smaller. I will take this subject up again at a later date.
The model holds that in one string cycle, one sphere is making two units of n-magnons and one unit of p-electons, and the other sphere is making one unit of s-magnons and two units of e-electons. This suggests that retraction and integration of magnon and electon strings into primordial goo takes longer than one half of a string cycle. This is the subject of my next blog. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com
Sunday, January 15, 2012
Self-induction of elastic strings
The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.
My model for the elastic string cycle and the self-induction of elastic strings demands that photons are creating e-electons and p-electons in the same time frame. We can only measure the one in excess because the other becomes bound to its complimentary twin. Interference experiments prove that the two fields cancel each other out as discussed in a future blog. This would also be true for magnons.
If electons and magnons share equally in compressing the photon during the string cycle, it means that 299,792,459 complementary electon pairs surround and constrict the photon as they retract compared to just one complementary magnon pair. Perhaps, then, there are something like 100 n-magnons bound to 100 s-magnons, which would mean there would be 29,979,245,900 e-electons bound to the same number of p-electons. The bound, retracting complementary pairs would cover the electron like an orange peel, which ultimately constricts the electron into an extremely dense particle. The energy of the retracting strings is stored as potential energy in the form of a dense elastic ball of primordial goo. A portion of this goo is destined to become virtual particles in the next string cycle. Kelland—www.vestheory.com
My model for the elastic string cycle and the self-induction of elastic strings demands that photons are creating e-electons and p-electons in the same time frame. We can only measure the one in excess because the other becomes bound to its complimentary twin. Interference experiments prove that the two fields cancel each other out as discussed in a future blog. This would also be true for magnons.
If electons and magnons share equally in compressing the photon during the string cycle, it means that 299,792,459 complementary electon pairs surround and constrict the photon as they retract compared to just one complementary magnon pair. Perhaps, then, there are something like 100 n-magnons bound to 100 s-magnons, which would mean there would be 29,979,245,900 e-electons bound to the same number of p-electons. The bound, retracting complementary pairs would cover the electron like an orange peel, which ultimately constricts the electron into an extremely dense particle. The energy of the retracting strings is stored as potential energy in the form of a dense elastic ball of primordial goo. A portion of this goo is destined to become virtual particles in the next string cycle. Kelland—www.vestheory.com
Friday, January 13, 2012
Composition of the photon’s electric and magnetic fields
The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.
In the previous blog, we saw how the speed of light is equal to magnitude of the photon’s electric field divided by the magnitude of the photon’s magnetic field.
The electric field E is proportional to the lines of electric force, which according to elastic string theory is proportional to the number of electons creating this field. In the same manner, the magnetic field B is proportional to the lines of magnetic force, which is proportional to the number of magnons creating this field. This leads to the conclusion that the number of electons emanating from a photon divided by the number of magnons is equal to the speed of light.
Thus,
This means there are exactly 299,792,459 electons for every magnon. I believe it is relevant that careful measurement of the speed of light shows that the number of electons is an even number when compared to magnons, just as expected if we are dealing with the number of elastic strings.
Since the energy density of the electon field is equal to the energy density of the magnon field, it must take 299,792,459 electons to equal the energy of one magnon. It is possible then that the mass of one magnon is equal to the mass of 299,792,459 electons.
In the next blog, I will review string cycles in view of this new information, and what this means for the self-induction of elastic strings. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com
In the previous blog, we saw how the speed of light is equal to magnitude of the photon’s electric field divided by the magnitude of the photon’s magnetic field.
The electric field E is proportional to the lines of electric force, which according to elastic string theory is proportional to the number of electons creating this field. In the same manner, the magnetic field B is proportional to the lines of magnetic force, which is proportional to the number of magnons creating this field. This leads to the conclusion that the number of electons emanating from a photon divided by the number of magnons is equal to the speed of light.
Thus,
This means there are exactly 299,792,459 electons for every magnon. I believe it is relevant that careful measurement of the speed of light shows that the number of electons is an even number when compared to magnons, just as expected if we are dealing with the number of elastic strings.
Since the energy density of the electon field is equal to the energy density of the magnon field, it must take 299,792,459 electons to equal the energy of one magnon. It is possible then that the mass of one magnon is equal to the mass of 299,792,459 electons.
In the next blog, I will review string cycles in view of this new information, and what this means for the self-induction of elastic strings. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com
Thursday, January 12, 2012
Elastic strings dictate speed of light
The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.
James Maxwell was able to show that the speed of light could be calculated using the electric constant and magnetic constant in the following way.
I have found no easy way to use these symbols for the constants in a blog except as bitmaps, which is very cumbersome; therefore, in the next paragraph, ec becomes the electric constant and mc the magnetic constant.
Maxwell came to these conclusions:
1. Energy density of the electric field = ½ ec E^2,where ec is the electric constant with a value of 8.854 x 10^-12 F/m, and E is the electric field, which is a vector force. The value of this constant was determined in the laboratory by experimentation. This made it possible for Maxwell to calculate the velocity of light.
2. Energy density of the magnetic field = ½ B^2/mc, where mc is the magnetic constant with a value of 4pi x 10^-7 H/m, and B is the magnetic field, which is a vector force. The magnetic constant is a value derived to satisfy the requirements of the energy of the magnetic field.
The energy density of the electric field = energy density of the magnetic field. Thus: ½ ec E^2 = ½ B^2/mc
Because the energy density of the electric field and magnetic field are equal, we can combine the two equations and show the following relationship:
This shows very clearly why the ratio of the electric field and magnetic field equals the velocity of light. This is only possible if the fields, which are composed of elastic strings, are somehow intimately and directly responsible for the velocity of light. We will continue with this discussion in the next blog. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com
James Maxwell was able to show that the speed of light could be calculated using the electric constant and magnetic constant in the following way.
I have found no easy way to use these symbols for the constants in a blog except as bitmaps, which is very cumbersome; therefore, in the next paragraph, ec becomes the electric constant and mc the magnetic constant.
Maxwell came to these conclusions:
1. Energy density of the electric field = ½ ec E^2,where ec is the electric constant with a value of 8.854 x 10^-12 F/m, and E is the electric field, which is a vector force. The value of this constant was determined in the laboratory by experimentation. This made it possible for Maxwell to calculate the velocity of light.
2. Energy density of the magnetic field = ½ B^2/mc, where mc is the magnetic constant with a value of 4pi x 10^-7 H/m, and B is the magnetic field, which is a vector force. The magnetic constant is a value derived to satisfy the requirements of the energy of the magnetic field.
The energy density of the electric field = energy density of the magnetic field. Thus: ½ ec E^2 = ½ B^2/mc
Because the energy density of the electric field and magnetic field are equal, we can combine the two equations and show the following relationship:
This shows very clearly why the ratio of the electric field and magnetic field equals the velocity of light. This is only possible if the fields, which are composed of elastic strings, are somehow intimately and directly responsible for the velocity of light. We will continue with this discussion in the next blog. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com
Wednesday, January 11, 2012
The speed of light
The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.
The speed of light has been studied by a number of individuals from various countries around the world for more than 300 years. In the 1600s, Galileo attempted to determine its velocity by using two lanterns separated by a great distance. He concluded that the speed of light was either instantaneous or had great velocity. Various other methods have been used since that time including observations of Jupiter’s moons, aberration of star light, toothed wheels, rotating mirrors, etc. Values obtained ranged from 214,000,000 meters per second to 315,000,000 meters per second.
In 1862, a Frenchman by the name of Foucault used rotating mirrors to estimate its speed at 298,000,000 m/s. A few years later, James Clerk Maxwell discovered that the velocity of light could be calculated using its magnetic and electric properties. This method arrives at 299,781,000 m/s for the speed of light. This is only an estimate because the electric property used in the equation is determined by experimentation.
At the present time, the velocity of light is determined by using a laser light of known frequency and wavelength. This allows the speed of light to be calculated with great accuracy.
Photon speed = wavelength x frequency = 299,792,459.0 meters per second plus or minus just 0.0008 meters per second.
I believe it is more than mere coincidence that the remainder is zero. This will become clear in future blogs.
In the next blog, I will discuss how Maxwell was able to calculate the speed of light using its magnetic and electric properties. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com
The speed of light has been studied by a number of individuals from various countries around the world for more than 300 years. In the 1600s, Galileo attempted to determine its velocity by using two lanterns separated by a great distance. He concluded that the speed of light was either instantaneous or had great velocity. Various other methods have been used since that time including observations of Jupiter’s moons, aberration of star light, toothed wheels, rotating mirrors, etc. Values obtained ranged from 214,000,000 meters per second to 315,000,000 meters per second.
In 1862, a Frenchman by the name of Foucault used rotating mirrors to estimate its speed at 298,000,000 m/s. A few years later, James Clerk Maxwell discovered that the velocity of light could be calculated using its magnetic and electric properties. This method arrives at 299,781,000 m/s for the speed of light. This is only an estimate because the electric property used in the equation is determined by experimentation.
At the present time, the velocity of light is determined by using a laser light of known frequency and wavelength. This allows the speed of light to be calculated with great accuracy.
Photon speed = wavelength x frequency = 299,792,459.0 meters per second plus or minus just 0.0008 meters per second.
I believe it is more than mere coincidence that the remainder is zero. This will become clear in future blogs.
In the next blog, I will discuss how Maxwell was able to calculate the speed of light using its magnetic and electric properties. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com
Tuesday, January 10, 2012
Sources of energy for the photon’s string cycles
The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.
When a virtual particle that is to become a string is ejected into space, it remains attached to its source. For this reason, the string that develops behind the particle is stretched to a great length. This process stores potential energy in the stretched string. This means the energy needed to retract the elastic strings comes primarily from the potential energy stored in the string when it is ejected from the photon. We are dealing with a substance that has perfect elasticity, which allows the string to retract back to its source with great velocity. During retraction, there is no loss in energy because it is transformed to potential energy in the form of dense primordial goo inside the electron.
It is envisioned that gravitons exist for more than one string cycle. Gravitons do not bind to other gravitons because each is unique, but they aid in the constriction of the photon. As the photon spins on its axis, it winds the gravitons up like a fishing line on a reel, which constricts the photon forming two spheres. This requires a source of energy. In this case the energy comes from the photon’s spin angular momentum, which is dependent upon the rate a photon spins on its axis and its mass.
Spin angular momentum = spin velocity x mass x photon radius
String theory suggests that a photon spin on its axes because it travels through a matrix of gravitons that couples linear velocity to spin velocity as the photon rubs against the gravitons in its path. A slightly denser concentration of gravitons on one side would dictate direction of spin. I will explain how a photon maintains its linear velocity at a later date. This is a fascinating story that has much to do with Einstein and the special theory of relativity.
.
A photon with large mass, such as an x-ray, goes through its string cycle much faster than a lowly radio wave that has little mass. This is true because the x-ray photon has much greater spin angular momentum. The energy required for the radio wave photon to go through its string cycle is much less because the cycle is spread out over a much longer period of time. It takes less gas for a car to get to 60 miles per hour if it arrives at this speed slowly rather than putting the pedal to the metal, so to speak. In the end, however, both cars get to the same speed just as the radio wave photon and x-ray photon end up creating the same number of strings.
We know string cycles are directly related to the mass of the photon because this relationship holds: hf = mass x c^2. Here we see that f, the frequency of oscillation, is directly related to the mass of the photon. In this equation h is Planck’s constant and c is the velocity of light, which is constant for all photons.
In my next blog, I will examine the velocity of light. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com
When a virtual particle that is to become a string is ejected into space, it remains attached to its source. For this reason, the string that develops behind the particle is stretched to a great length. This process stores potential energy in the stretched string. This means the energy needed to retract the elastic strings comes primarily from the potential energy stored in the string when it is ejected from the photon. We are dealing with a substance that has perfect elasticity, which allows the string to retract back to its source with great velocity. During retraction, there is no loss in energy because it is transformed to potential energy in the form of dense primordial goo inside the electron.
It is envisioned that gravitons exist for more than one string cycle. Gravitons do not bind to other gravitons because each is unique, but they aid in the constriction of the photon. As the photon spins on its axis, it winds the gravitons up like a fishing line on a reel, which constricts the photon forming two spheres. This requires a source of energy. In this case the energy comes from the photon’s spin angular momentum, which is dependent upon the rate a photon spins on its axis and its mass.
Spin angular momentum = spin velocity x mass x photon radius
String theory suggests that a photon spin on its axes because it travels through a matrix of gravitons that couples linear velocity to spin velocity as the photon rubs against the gravitons in its path. A slightly denser concentration of gravitons on one side would dictate direction of spin. I will explain how a photon maintains its linear velocity at a later date. This is a fascinating story that has much to do with Einstein and the special theory of relativity.
.
A photon with large mass, such as an x-ray, goes through its string cycle much faster than a lowly radio wave that has little mass. This is true because the x-ray photon has much greater spin angular momentum. The energy required for the radio wave photon to go through its string cycle is much less because the cycle is spread out over a much longer period of time. It takes less gas for a car to get to 60 miles per hour if it arrives at this speed slowly rather than putting the pedal to the metal, so to speak. In the end, however, both cars get to the same speed just as the radio wave photon and x-ray photon end up creating the same number of strings.
We know string cycles are directly related to the mass of the photon because this relationship holds: hf = mass x c^2. Here we see that f, the frequency of oscillation, is directly related to the mass of the photon. In this equation h is Planck’s constant and c is the velocity of light, which is constant for all photons.
In my next blog, I will examine the velocity of light. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com
Monday, January 9, 2012
Magnetic fields, electric fields, and gravitational fields are self-inducing
The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.
The creation of elastic strings is cyclic and never ending because atoms and strings have perfect elasticity. The energy of the system during the string cycle is always constant. It is either conserved as potential energy in a stretched elastic string or as potential energy in the form of a super-condensed primordial elastic goo. My model for the self induction of the photon’s elastic strings is similar to the self induction of the force fields by an electron. It involves four stages.
• Beginning at that point in time when the photon has retracted all its strings, the internal pressure inside the photon is greatest, and the elastic strings have metamorphosed into dense primordial goo for the next round of strings.
• When the internal pressure reaches a critical state, the photon begins ejecting new virtual particles that develop into strings.
• Virtual particles continue to be ejected in stages until a maximum number of strings is achieved. At this point in time, the internal pressure of the photon has been reduced to a point where it can no longer eject virtul particles. However, the photon is surrounded by elastic strings that have begun to retract because of their perfect elasticity.
• This model requires that in addition to free strings that we measure with our instruments, the photon also creates p-electons and e-electons that bind and cover the photon like an orange peel. In the same manner, the theory holds that the photon is creating complementary magnons that bind and cover the outer surface of the photon. As the bound complementary strings retract back to their own portals, they force the surface of the photon inward, which causes the enclosed perfectly elastic goo to be compressed into primordial goo. The photon very quickly arrives at maximum internal pressure.
My model requires that in one string cycle two units of n-magnons are created for every unit of s-magnons. We cannot detect the s-magnons with our instruments because they rapidly become bound to n-magnons. In the next string cycle, two units of s-magnons are created and one unit of n-magnons. In this case, our instruments can detect one unit of s-magnons not bound to their complementary strings.
Just as magnons alternate as explained so do electons. In one string cycle two units of e-electons and one unit of p-electons are created, and in the next string cycle the opposite occurs.
There is one other piece to this puzzle. Gravitons exist for more than one string cycle, which allows them to wind up around the center of the photon as it spins on its axis. Gravitons are responsible for dividing the photon into two spheres.
The model holds that magnons and electons are equally important to the self-induction of force fields. It also holds that gravitons have a very important role in this process.
I know of no evidence that shows photons make n-magnons and s-magnons in the same string cycle; and in the same manner, I know of no evidence that photons make p-electons and e-electons in the same string cycle. On the other hand, I know of no evidence to show this is not true. Hopefully scientists will take this serious enough to think of a way to test this hypothesis.
In the next blog, I will discuss the sources of energy that drives the string cycles. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com
The creation of elastic strings is cyclic and never ending because atoms and strings have perfect elasticity. The energy of the system during the string cycle is always constant. It is either conserved as potential energy in a stretched elastic string or as potential energy in the form of a super-condensed primordial elastic goo. My model for the self induction of the photon’s elastic strings is similar to the self induction of the force fields by an electron. It involves four stages.
• Beginning at that point in time when the photon has retracted all its strings, the internal pressure inside the photon is greatest, and the elastic strings have metamorphosed into dense primordial goo for the next round of strings.
• When the internal pressure reaches a critical state, the photon begins ejecting new virtual particles that develop into strings.
• Virtual particles continue to be ejected in stages until a maximum number of strings is achieved. At this point in time, the internal pressure of the photon has been reduced to a point where it can no longer eject virtul particles. However, the photon is surrounded by elastic strings that have begun to retract because of their perfect elasticity.
• This model requires that in addition to free strings that we measure with our instruments, the photon also creates p-electons and e-electons that bind and cover the photon like an orange peel. In the same manner, the theory holds that the photon is creating complementary magnons that bind and cover the outer surface of the photon. As the bound complementary strings retract back to their own portals, they force the surface of the photon inward, which causes the enclosed perfectly elastic goo to be compressed into primordial goo. The photon very quickly arrives at maximum internal pressure.
My model requires that in one string cycle two units of n-magnons are created for every unit of s-magnons. We cannot detect the s-magnons with our instruments because they rapidly become bound to n-magnons. In the next string cycle, two units of s-magnons are created and one unit of n-magnons. In this case, our instruments can detect one unit of s-magnons not bound to their complementary strings.
Just as magnons alternate as explained so do electons. In one string cycle two units of e-electons and one unit of p-electons are created, and in the next string cycle the opposite occurs.
There is one other piece to this puzzle. Gravitons exist for more than one string cycle, which allows them to wind up around the center of the photon as it spins on its axis. Gravitons are responsible for dividing the photon into two spheres.
The model holds that magnons and electons are equally important to the self-induction of force fields. It also holds that gravitons have a very important role in this process.
I know of no evidence that shows photons make n-magnons and s-magnons in the same string cycle; and in the same manner, I know of no evidence that photons make p-electons and e-electons in the same string cycle. On the other hand, I know of no evidence to show this is not true. Hopefully scientists will take this serious enough to think of a way to test this hypothesis.
In the next blog, I will discuss the sources of energy that drives the string cycles. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com
Sunday, January 8, 2012
The photon and its strings
Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.
My model for the photon is quite similar to my model for the electron. I believe the photon is divided into two spheres by gravitons that encircle the photon much like a fishing line wound around a reel. One sphere ejects magnon and electon virtual particles composed of n-goo and the other sphere emits magnon and electon virtual particles composed of s-goo. Because the portals for gravitons arise between the two spheres, all gravitons are composed of various amounts of n-goo and s-goo such that no two gravitons are identical. Gravitons are also created in the same time frames; however, I propose that the retraction of gravitons requires several string cycles. During any one string cycle, all strings are created in the same time frame. Up to this point, the photon and its string cycles are identical to the electron. However there are major differences in the ratio of strings created.
In the previous blog, we saw that photons actually have two distinct string cycles. In one cycle free n-magnons are created and in the next cycle free s-magnons are created. Free electons vary in the same manner. The model holds that the combined mass and energy of the strings created on one sphere is identical to the mass and energy of strings created on the other sphere. Free strings never become bound to their complementary twin. The creation of the photon’s free strings is shown in the following illustration.
My model for the self induction of the force fields is discussed in the next blog. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com
My model for the photon is quite similar to my model for the electron. I believe the photon is divided into two spheres by gravitons that encircle the photon much like a fishing line wound around a reel. One sphere ejects magnon and electon virtual particles composed of n-goo and the other sphere emits magnon and electon virtual particles composed of s-goo. Because the portals for gravitons arise between the two spheres, all gravitons are composed of various amounts of n-goo and s-goo such that no two gravitons are identical. Gravitons are also created in the same time frames; however, I propose that the retraction of gravitons requires several string cycles. During any one string cycle, all strings are created in the same time frame. Up to this point, the photon and its string cycles are identical to the electron. However there are major differences in the ratio of strings created.
In the previous blog, we saw that photons actually have two distinct string cycles. In one cycle free n-magnons are created and in the next cycle free s-magnons are created. Free electons vary in the same manner. The model holds that the combined mass and energy of the strings created on one sphere is identical to the mass and energy of strings created on the other sphere. Free strings never become bound to their complementary twin. The creation of the photon’s free strings is shown in the following illustration.
My model for the self induction of the force fields is discussed in the next blog. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com
Saturday, January 7, 2012
Photon has two string cycles
The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.
In contrast to the electron, a photon has two string cycles for every oscillation cycle, whereas the electron has just one. The photon’s string cycles are shown in the following illustration:
My model for the structure of a photon and self inducing string cycles is described in the next blog. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com
In contrast to the electron, a photon has two string cycles for every oscillation cycle, whereas the electron has just one. The photon’s string cycles are shown in the following illustration:
My model for the structure of a photon and self inducing string cycles is described in the next blog. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com
Friday, January 6, 2012
Atom oscillation frequency determines photon frequency
The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.
As explained in the previous blog, the atom’s electrons and quarks have the same string cycle frequency because the two subatomic particles are connected by elastic strings.
The oscillation frequency of the photons emitted by atoms during photon emission increases if the atom’s frequency of oscillation is raised. This means atoms not only emit visible light, as previously discussed, but other photons as well depending on the oscillation frequency of the atom. This makes it possible for a radio station transmitting antenna to emit radio wave photons with different frequencies. This is accomplished by controlling the oscillation frequency of the atoms with an electric current.
We might imagine that a quark spinning on its axis assimilates some of the proton’s elastic goo, which becomes available to be ejected as a photon. Ejection only takes place when the velocity of the quark is suddenly accelerated, which in turn rapidly increases its spin angular momentum. The faster the acceleration, the larger the mass ejected as a photon.
As explained previous, the photon ejected by a quark is captured by an electron in orbit about the proton. The electron moves to an outer orbit because of an increase in spin angular momentum. This is an unstable state and the electron emits this photon or one of less mass and moves to an inner orbit. In the case of the radio wave transmitter oscillating at low frequency, the photon emitted is a small radio wave.
It is likely that ejection takes place shortly after the beginning of the string cycle when the goo inside the quark is at its densest state and a new string cycle is commencing. At this point in time the conserved potential energy in the condensed goo is greatest.
As explained in the previous blog, the atom’s electrons and quarks have the same string cycle frequency because the two subatomic particles are connected by elastic strings.
The oscillation frequency of the photons emitted by atoms during photon emission increases if the atom’s frequency of oscillation is raised. This means atoms not only emit visible light, as previously discussed, but other photons as well depending on the oscillation frequency of the atom. This makes it possible for a radio station transmitting antenna to emit radio wave photons with different frequencies. This is accomplished by controlling the oscillation frequency of the atoms with an electric current.
We might imagine that a quark spinning on its axis assimilates some of the proton’s elastic goo, which becomes available to be ejected as a photon. Ejection only takes place when the velocity of the quark is suddenly accelerated, which in turn rapidly increases its spin angular momentum. The faster the acceleration, the larger the mass ejected as a photon.
As explained previous, the photon ejected by a quark is captured by an electron in orbit about the proton. The electron moves to an outer orbit because of an increase in spin angular momentum. This is an unstable state and the electron emits this photon or one of less mass and moves to an inner orbit. In the case of the radio wave transmitter oscillating at low frequency, the photon emitted is a small radio wave.
It is likely that ejection takes place shortly after the beginning of the string cycle when the goo inside the quark is at its densest state and a new string cycle is commencing. At this point in time the conserved potential energy in the condensed goo is greatest.
Thursday, January 5, 2012
Photons come from mass not energy
The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.
A burning fire gives off many different colors because there are many different hot atoms involved, and each one gives off its own distinct pattern. It is important to note that photon emission involves the whole atom, not just the electrons in orbit about the protons.
An electric light bulb with a tungsten filament is an extreme case of photon emission. A 100 watt light bulb burns for about 1000 hours. The photons emitted by the light bulb during its life time far exceeds the light put out by a pile of burning logs. It can be shown that the electrons in the tungsten filament, including those flowing as part of the electric current, have insufficient mass to account for the mass of the photons emitted by the light bulb. It seems there are two possibilities. First, it might be imagined that the energy of the moving electrons is converted to mass, which is then emitted as photons we see as visible light. The second possibility is that quarks inside the nucleus of the atom convert some of the mass of the atom into photons, which are then passed to the electrons in orbit. The electrons would then become unstable, move to an outer orbit, and emit photons that we see as visible light.
Let’s examine the first possibility. To me, it is inconceivable that energy, which is a mathematical concept, can be converted to mass. In the case of a fluorescent light bulb, the highly energetic electrons boiling off the end of the electrodes jostle the mercury atoms inside the tube, which give off photons. The free electrons entering the tube do not emit light even though they are being jostled about by the AC current.
The second possibility does not require mass to be created from energy, and the mass of the tungsten atom would only have to be depleted a very small, insignificant percentage to account for the mass of all the photons created by a tungsten filament during its life time. A quark spinning inside a proton would be jostled and energized by the electric current. Under these conditions, it is visualized that a quark spinning on its axis would incorporate some of the mass of the proton into photons which it would then pass on to the electrons in orbit about the proton. This would increase the angular momentum of the electron and cause it to move to an outer orbit where it is less stable. Eventually it would emit the photon, and we would see it as visible light. The reverse of this process would allow exogenous photons to be incorporated back into the nucleus of the tungsten atom, which would restore its mass.
Passage of photons between quarks and electrons would be facilitated because both would be going through their string cycles in the same time frame because the two are connected by elastic strings. P-electons emanating from protons (quarks) become bound to e-electons emanating from electrons in orbit about the protons, which pulls the two string cycles into synchrony.
I have presented this subject to explain that it is not necessary to believe in the conversion of mass to energy and vise versa to explain photon emission. Kelland—www.vestheory.com
A burning fire gives off many different colors because there are many different hot atoms involved, and each one gives off its own distinct pattern. It is important to note that photon emission involves the whole atom, not just the electrons in orbit about the protons.
An electric light bulb with a tungsten filament is an extreme case of photon emission. A 100 watt light bulb burns for about 1000 hours. The photons emitted by the light bulb during its life time far exceeds the light put out by a pile of burning logs. It can be shown that the electrons in the tungsten filament, including those flowing as part of the electric current, have insufficient mass to account for the mass of the photons emitted by the light bulb. It seems there are two possibilities. First, it might be imagined that the energy of the moving electrons is converted to mass, which is then emitted as photons we see as visible light. The second possibility is that quarks inside the nucleus of the atom convert some of the mass of the atom into photons, which are then passed to the electrons in orbit. The electrons would then become unstable, move to an outer orbit, and emit photons that we see as visible light.
Let’s examine the first possibility. To me, it is inconceivable that energy, which is a mathematical concept, can be converted to mass. In the case of a fluorescent light bulb, the highly energetic electrons boiling off the end of the electrodes jostle the mercury atoms inside the tube, which give off photons. The free electrons entering the tube do not emit light even though they are being jostled about by the AC current.
The second possibility does not require mass to be created from energy, and the mass of the tungsten atom would only have to be depleted a very small, insignificant percentage to account for the mass of all the photons created by a tungsten filament during its life time. A quark spinning inside a proton would be jostled and energized by the electric current. Under these conditions, it is visualized that a quark spinning on its axis would incorporate some of the mass of the proton into photons which it would then pass on to the electrons in orbit about the proton. This would increase the angular momentum of the electron and cause it to move to an outer orbit where it is less stable. Eventually it would emit the photon, and we would see it as visible light. The reverse of this process would allow exogenous photons to be incorporated back into the nucleus of the tungsten atom, which would restore its mass.
Passage of photons between quarks and electrons would be facilitated because both would be going through their string cycles in the same time frame because the two are connected by elastic strings. P-electons emanating from protons (quarks) become bound to e-electons emanating from electrons in orbit about the protons, which pulls the two string cycles into synchrony.
I have presented this subject to explain that it is not necessary to believe in the conversion of mass to energy and vise versa to explain photon emission. Kelland—www.vestheory.com
Wednesday, January 4, 2012
Source of photons
The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D
We have already seen that sun light comes from preexisting mass during fusion processes on our Sun. Let’s examine some observations here on Earth.
Scientists know that electrons absorb photons. When this occurs, the electron moves to an outer orbit as it circles the proton. This is an unstable position, and the electron immediately ejects a photon of the same frequency or one of less frequency. In this scenario the electron is merely acting on a preexisting photon from some exogenous source.
Photons are also created when atoms are heated. Burning fires and electric light bulbs are good examples. In the case of a light bulb with a tungsten filament, the filament is raised to 2000 degrees centigrade, which causes it to emit light. This source of light is referred to as photon emission.
The light emitted when an atom is heated to a high temperature is specific for a specific atom. In practice, the photons emitted by a hot gas are examined in a spectroscope. This instrument records the frequency of the light given off by the gas. Each gas has its own spectral pattern. A few spectral examples were borrowed and slightly modified from Wikipedia.
The question is where do these photons come from? This is the subject of my next blog.
We have already seen that sun light comes from preexisting mass during fusion processes on our Sun. Let’s examine some observations here on Earth.
Scientists know that electrons absorb photons. When this occurs, the electron moves to an outer orbit as it circles the proton. This is an unstable position, and the electron immediately ejects a photon of the same frequency or one of less frequency. In this scenario the electron is merely acting on a preexisting photon from some exogenous source.
Photons are also created when atoms are heated. Burning fires and electric light bulbs are good examples. In the case of a light bulb with a tungsten filament, the filament is raised to 2000 degrees centigrade, which causes it to emit light. This source of light is referred to as photon emission.
The light emitted when an atom is heated to a high temperature is specific for a specific atom. In practice, the photons emitted by a hot gas are examined in a spectroscope. This instrument records the frequency of the light given off by the gas. Each gas has its own spectral pattern. A few spectral examples were borrowed and slightly modified from Wikipedia.
The question is where do these photons come from? This is the subject of my next blog.
Tuesday, January 3, 2012
Einstein’s dilemma
The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.
The most fundamental equation that forms the basis of Einstein’s special theory of relativity was actually derived by Hendrik Lorentz in 1892 to explain the Michelson-Morley experiment that was carried out a few years earlier. The Michelson-Morley experiment had to do with the invariant nature of the speed of light. This is a wonderful story that I will come back to at a later date.
Einstein’s use of the Lorentz equation led him to this conclusion:
Let v be the velocity of any particle and c the velocity of light. If the particle is traveling at the speed of light, then the lower part of the equation becomes zero and the flight mass is infinite. This is a no no, which caused Einstein to conclude that a photon traveling at the speed of light has no mass.
Now we see why physicists who believe in the special theory of relativity are so concerned over the reported findings that neutrinos with known mass travel faster than the speed of light. And now you can better appreciate why I have presented numerous experiments and lines of evidence that show photons have mass while in flight.
We know that photons arriving here from the Sun come from preexisting mass; however, there are other sources of photons. We will begin this discussion in my next blog. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com
The most fundamental equation that forms the basis of Einstein’s special theory of relativity was actually derived by Hendrik Lorentz in 1892 to explain the Michelson-Morley experiment that was carried out a few years earlier. The Michelson-Morley experiment had to do with the invariant nature of the speed of light. This is a wonderful story that I will come back to at a later date.
Einstein’s use of the Lorentz equation led him to this conclusion:
Let v be the velocity of any particle and c the velocity of light. If the particle is traveling at the speed of light, then the lower part of the equation becomes zero and the flight mass is infinite. This is a no no, which caused Einstein to conclude that a photon traveling at the speed of light has no mass.
Now we see why physicists who believe in the special theory of relativity are so concerned over the reported findings that neutrinos with known mass travel faster than the speed of light. And now you can better appreciate why I have presented numerous experiments and lines of evidence that show photons have mass while in flight.
We know that photons arriving here from the Sun come from preexisting mass; however, there are other sources of photons. We will begin this discussion in my next blog. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com
Monday, January 2, 2012
If elastic strings have mass, photons have mass.
The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.
Photons create elastic strings. If the elastic strings created have mass, then surely photons have mass. I will only summarize the observations here.
• Diffraction experiments provide strong evidence that magnons and electons have
mass.
• Spinning table tennis balls are deflected by magnetic fields, showing us
magnons have mass.
• Spinning table tennis balls are deflected in a pure vacuum showing us that
gravitons have mass.
• Particle-wave duality can be explained if elastic strings have mass.
• The wave properties of electrons in orbit about protons can be explained if
electons and magnons have mass.
• Mercury’s precession can be explained if gravitons have mass.
• Earth’s polar wobble on axis can be explained if gravitons have mass.
• Tilt of a planet on its axis can be explained if gravitons have mass.
• Venus’ slow spin rate can be explained if gravitons have mass.
• Transfer of momentum from inner body to satellite can be explained if
gravitons have mass.
All the evidence shows that elastic strings have mass, and because elastic strings emanate from photons, common sense tells us that photons have mass. Kelland—www.vestheory.com
Photons create elastic strings. If the elastic strings created have mass, then surely photons have mass. I will only summarize the observations here.
• Diffraction experiments provide strong evidence that magnons and electons have
mass.
• Spinning table tennis balls are deflected by magnetic fields, showing us
magnons have mass.
• Spinning table tennis balls are deflected in a pure vacuum showing us that
gravitons have mass.
• Particle-wave duality can be explained if elastic strings have mass.
• The wave properties of electrons in orbit about protons can be explained if
electons and magnons have mass.
• Mercury’s precession can be explained if gravitons have mass.
• Earth’s polar wobble on axis can be explained if gravitons have mass.
• Tilt of a planet on its axis can be explained if gravitons have mass.
• Venus’ slow spin rate can be explained if gravitons have mass.
• Transfer of momentum from inner body to satellite can be explained if
gravitons have mass.
All the evidence shows that elastic strings have mass, and because elastic strings emanate from photons, common sense tells us that photons have mass. Kelland—www.vestheory.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)