Copyright (C) 2002 by Lew Paxton Price
The following is a quote from an article written by Leon M. Lederman found in Scientific American - The Laureate's Anthology, Vol. II, The Upsilon Particle.
"As accelerator techniques advance, physicists will undoubtedly continue to discover new subatomic entities. The proliferation will raise deep, unsettling questions. Are the kinds of quark limited in number? If there are six, why not 12? If there are 12, why not 24? And if the number of kinds of quark is large, does it make any sense to call the quarks elementary? The history of science suggests that the proliferation of physical entities is a sign the entities are not elementary. The chemists of the 19th century reduced the apparently infinite variety of chemical substances to some 36 elements which escalated over the years to more than 100. As indivisible, ultimate constituents of matter the chemical elements simply proved to be too many. In the 1930s it was discovered that all elements were made up of electrons, protons, and neutrons. After World War II, these particles were joined by dozens of others: pions, kaons, lambda particles and so on. Again there were too many. Then it seemed that all of these could be reduced to three quarks. Now experiments indicate that a fourth and fifth quark exist. Are they also too many? Will simpler structures from which quarks are made soon be proposed? Is it possible that there are no elementary particles at all, that every entity in nature has constituent parts? Or will the ultimate simplicity that most physicists believe in, be lodged in the mathematical groups that order the particles rather than in truly elementary objects?"
The Simple Things and the Pyramid
There is a principle that governs the universe that might be described in two ways. First, it can be said that complex things are derived from simple things. This was known by those who lived long ago and can be found in Sanskrit, Ancient Hebrew (which comes from a much older source and was "borrowed" by the ancient Judeans), and ancient Chinese among others. It was later discovered by Benoit Mandelbrot who found it in the nature of fractals and by Stephen Wolfram who discovered it via computer programs. Assuming that there is a Creator, He/She apparently understood it and used it to create the universe.
Second, according to ancient wisdom there is a pyramid of natural principles which exists in the Plane of the Eternal. The Plane of the Eternal is not located in any particular time because it has existed forever, and will continue to exist forever. Furthermore, it has been in every universe that has existed, is in every universe existing now, and will exist in every universe that will exist. It is a plane meant only to contain the pyramid of principles, and these principles are always present everywhere and everywhen.
Some of these principles are laws, rules, axioms, and postulates which are very fundamental such as one is unity, one plus one is two, zero is the sum of an infinite combination of positive and negative numbers, space has three dimensions, triangles form rigid structures, life is the ordering principle, death is the disordering principle necessary to create more building blocks for life to use, and the sum of everything is nothing. Others are consequences of the more fundamental principles such as those relating to chemistry, biology, sociology, or history.
This pyramid is the ordering of the principles, with the most fundamental found at the top, and those which are consequences of many consequences found at the bottom. The fundamental principle which is the key to all principles is its point at the top and all else follows. Each higher layer of the pyramid is the key to the principles found in the adjacent lower layer. So the pyramid grows from the top downward.
We are born into a universe in which we perceive, with our senses, only the principles at the lowermost levels of the pyramid. To us, this universe is a magic show in which we must learn the rules through trial and error. As time passes, each succeeding generation manages to use prior recorded knowledge, observation, and reason to arrive at higher levels of the pyramid. We begin to understand that the universe is a puzzle for us to solve as we look for the ways of the supposed Creator who designed it. We learn that the only way to solve the puzzle is to climb the pyramid until we reach the most fundamental principle of all at its top.
As we climb, some of us begin to understand that the key to everything is that simple things lead to complexity - and that sythesizing numbers of less complex things leads to even more complexity.
Apparently there is no necessity for us to climb this pyramid. We can remain at whatever level we choose. But if we wish to climb the pyramid, we must climb it by using each layer of known knowledge as a foundation to attain the next higher level. When we attempt to climb by jumping upward without a foundation below, we have deviated from the true path and must eventually fall back downward to our discomfort and chagrin.
In case you have not noticed, our physicists of late have been experiencing more and more problems with their theories. The universe is not conforming to Einstein's concept of curvature, there appears to be something called "dark energy" which is the name given to the dynamic ether so that the physics community can save face after telling us emphatically that space is empty, there is suddenly an acceleration of the expansion of the universe which upsets everything, there is "dark matter" which is a way to attempt to explain an effect caused by the accelerated expansion and which really does not conform to any "logic" for there being "dark matter", and the list goes on and on. Each time a discrepancy in accepted theory is noted a band-aid is applied and sometimes some chewing gum in an attempt to prevent anyone from discovering that the whole accepted paradigm is incorrect.
As of the time this little update within the introduction is being written, according to Georgi Dvali, writing in Scientific American, February, 2004, a new particle is being proposed that is being considered as a band-aid that an innocent public might be stupid enough to swallow. It is called the "inflaton" and is supposed to explain a problem with the accepted version of the time when the universe was inflating. This deception is a time-honored means of explaining things. The technique is to make up a wonderful theory or particle with a really great name and then see if people will buy it. If the new band-aid is advertised well, the majority will accept it just as they have Star Trek and its glib "scientific" explanations needed to explain each new episode.
Along with the inflaton are some alternate theories with the same obvious problems. I think at this time it would be most appropriate for those who see fairies and elves to tell the world that it was another race of creature called the flatus-folk who caused the effects that are being attributed to the inflaton.
According to accepted theory, "if the expansion of the universe had always been accelerating, it would have pulled apart the structures before they could be assembled." If the physicists involved were not so far off track in their understanding of gravity, they would know that it is caused by a pressure difference between a constant vacuum and nether pressure (the pressure of dynamic ether - what in accepted theory is now called "dark energy"). The nether density causes the pressure. The density grows less as the universe expands, and the pressure drops off as does gravity. Therefore, gravity in the earlier evolution of the universe was much greater than it is today.
The real problem lies in the fact that at one time physicists deviated from the true path up the pyramid and they are now suffering the consequences. Many of the current-day physicists realize that this has happened but are unable to discover where the deviation occurred. This is understandable when we realize that after the deviation, those in charge wrote the textbooks to include only the politically-correct parts that would support the deviation. The new generations of physicists read those texts and built a false structure upon that deviation. Today, we have a physics community that is so steeped in that deviation and its corrollaries that each member finds it very difficult to think in any other terms.
The only way to discover the point of deviation is to go backward to the time when that deviation occurred and examine it. This must be done by first going to a point farther back when we had a firm foundation telling us what was and what was not correct. Then we can go forward in time until we find a point when part of this foundation was discarded.
Early Fundamentals - Late 19th Century
What follows are some of the most fundamental rules known. These can be used to measure the validity of theories.
I. The laws of physics are the same everywhere in the universe, and at every time, that the universe has existed. Any supposed deviation from this rule has not been fully understood. This rule does not change.
II. Everything continues to be as it is, doing whatever it is doing, unless something changes it. When a change is forced, there is a tendency to resist the change. This is true of eveything from ideas to physical objects. It is a passive law in the sense that it only becomes evident when some thing or concept attempts to change some thing or concept. Today, this simple fundamental has been promoted to something akin to a force and is called inertia.
III. Complex things or concepts come from simple things or concepts.
IV. The universe is an entity filled with motion.
V. For motion to occur, there must be a passage of some type of time.
VI. Time is measured with motion.
VII. Velocity is relative. "At rest" does not exist except as a form of velocity which is zero relative to a particular reference.
VIII. Accelation is change and change is acceleration.
IX. Energy can only exist within a physical medium. An example is a cannon ball in motion in which the cannon ball is the medium. Another example is a sound wave in which the air is the medium.
X. Sir Isaac Newton's Definitions (in modern language).
1. Matter is proportional to weight.
2. The quantity of motion arises from velocity and the quantity of matter with that velocity.
3. Matter has a quality of inertia which is proportional to its mass.
4. An impressed force is action exerted upon a body, in order to change its state, either of rest, or of moving uniformly forward in line. This force consists of action only and remains no longer in the body when the action is over, for a body maintains every new state that it acquires, by its inertia only.
5. A centripetal force is that in which bodies are drawn or impelled, or in any way tend, toward a point as to a center.
6. The absolute quantity of a centripetal force is the measure of the centrifugal force which it opposes. For centripetal force is equal to centrifugal force for the body in question.
7. The accelerative quantity of a centripetal force is proportional to the velocity which it generates in a given time (acceleration equals velocity divided by time).
8. The motive quantity of a centripetal force is proportional to the motion which it generates in a given time. Thus, the weight is greater in a greater body, less in a lesser body; and in the same body, it is greater near to the earth, and less at remoter distances. This sort of quantity is the centripetency, or propension of the whole body towards the center, or its weight; and is always known by the quantity of an equal and contrary force just sufficient to hinder the descent of the body (this relates to the way the moon orbits the earth).
XI. Sir Isaac Newton's Explanatory Notes (in modern language).
1. Absolute, true, and mathematical time flows equably without regard to anything external and by another name is called duration: relative, apparent, and common time is some sensible and external measure of duration (see Numbers V and VI above).
a. Absolute space without regard to anything external, remains similar and immovable. In modern language, there is an inertial reference frame (IRF) in which the bodies in our universe move.
b. Relative space is some movable dimension or measure of absolute space which our senses determine by its position to bodies; and which is commonly taken for immovable space; such as celestial space which is determined relative to the earth. In modern language, all movement is relative.
c. Absolute space and relative space are the same in figure and magnitude, but they do not remain always numerically the same. For if earth, for instance, moves, a space of our air, which relatively and in respect of the earth remains the same, will at one time be one part of the absolute space into which the air passes; another time it will be another part of the same, and so, absolutely understood, it will be perpetually mutable (likely to change). In modern language, relative movement may show one thing at rest or with one direction and magnitude of movement relative to another, while its direction and magnitude of movement are different relative to the inertial reference frame.
a. Place is the volume of space used by a body and is either absolute or relative, according to the type of space used. Each place has a quantity (measure of volume). Places (volumes) may be equal in quantity but different in shape.
b. Positions have no quantity and the position of each place is merely a quality of that place.
c. The motion of the whole is the same thing as the motion of the sum of the parts; that is movement of the whole from its place is the same thing as the movement of the sum of the parts from their places, and for that reason, each place is internal, and within the whole body.
4. Absolute motion is the movement of a body from one absolute place to another; and relative motion, the movement from one relative place to another.
XII. Sir Isaac Newton's Laws of Motion (in modern language).
1. Every body has inertia. It perseveres in its state of rest or of uniform motion unless it is compelled to change that state by forces impressed upon it.
2. The alteration of motion is ever proportional to the motive force impressed and is made in the direction in which that force is impressed. Any force generates a motion, a double force generates a double motion, a triple force a triple motion, etc. so that the combination of forces produce a resultant force which acts as would a single force.
3. To every action there is always an equal and opposite reaction.
XIII. Simple Physics of Motion
1. There are three basics for movement in this universe; distance, time, and motion. Velocity is a measure of motion equal to distance moved divided by time used for the movement. We measure time as distance moved divided by velocity.
2. Acceleration equals velocity attained divided by the time used to attain that velocity - or distance attained divided by time squared. Gravity is a form of acceleration.
3. Mass is proportional to weight. It is the weight found at one location relative to the attracting mass divided by the the acceleration of gravity at that same relative location.
4. Momentum is the product of mass and its velocity.
5. Kinetic energy is the product of mass and its velocity squared divided by two. Potential energy is kinetic energy before it becomes kinetic energy.
6. Both momentum and energy are conserved. The laws stated for these conservations are: (1) the Law of Conservation of Momentum, and (2) the Law of Conservation of Energy. This means that total momentum and total energy remain the same after an event as they were before that event. In modern times, we know that mass is a form of energy and that one can be determined from the other
according to the equation E = m c 2 where c is the speed of light in space. With this new understanding, the law of conservation of energy still stands as one of the pillars of physics.
XIV. James Clerk Maxwell showed that magnetic and electrical phenomena appear to be parts of the same phenomenon, which led to a theory of electromagnetic energy requiring an ether of some kind. Hendrik Antoon Lorentz developed Maxwell's theory further and began the work on electron theory. This theory indicated very strongly that light moved through a medium which was then known as ether. A particle carrying electromagnetic energy was a rather ludricrous concept considering the complexity involved and the fact the light could move at one speed through air, slow down in a lens of glass, and then speed up again.
This was the stage that was set at the time of the Michelson-Morley experiment in 1887. The experiment was designed to prove the existence of an ether. Its results were positive in one sense, but failed to conform to the expected qualities of the ether. This failure was not explained and the positive aspects of the experiment were subsequently ignored by the proponents of the corpuscular theory for light. The new textbooks, written by the particle physicists, stated that the experiment proved that ether did not exist. Actually, the experiment proved only that relative ether velocity appeared to be lower than anticipated. This state of affairs contined while other such experiments were performed showing the same low relative ether velocities but with seasonal variations. In 1913 or 1914 (I have seen two dates for this) a man called Sagnac used a spinning device to prove the existence of an ether. The information was not allowed to be properly published, the textbooks were never changed to fit the data, a name was given to Sagnac's discovery (the "Sagnac effect"), and it was set aside and ignored.
Then came the unwanted information of electron spin and we appear to have found the point where the full magnitude of the deviation from the truth began. The electron is the first known entity in history to be promoted as something that can seemingly violate the law of conservation of momentum and the law of conservation of energy. Of course, this was glossed over without any proper explanation. Textbooks were changed to make it all seem to be correct. However, anyone who is not compelled by his own agenda and who can actually think critically can discover precisely why it was so necessary to prevent anyone from discovering the truth about electron spin.
In 1965 I was only twenty-six years old. I had just been promoted to the Air Force rank of captain. The old C-118 squadron had been broken up and I had become a navigator in a squadron flying C-130 Hercules aircraft, carried by the whim of world events. Our home at McGuire Air Force Base in New Jersey was too far from the Middle East for efficient use of the funds given by Congress to MATS (Military Air Transport Service), so we would go TDY (temporary duty) on occasion to Deols Air Base near Chateauroux, France. From Deols we would go on "round robins" to places like Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Iran, Iraq, Turkey, and so on. There were bases and embassies to be supplied with messages, goods, and sometimes people.
We would stay at Deols for twenty-one days at a time, flying throughout the Middle East and then coming back to crew rest for two or three days before going out again. While we were crew resting at Deols, we had four basic choices for entertainment. We could go off base, but the local people were not very fond of us and there was not much to do in Chateauroux. We could go to a bar on base and breathe stale cigarette smoke while we drank. We could go to the base movie theater, but there was seldom a movie worth watching. Or we could go to the base library which was large and well stocked. After learning what not to do, I usually chose the library, and during one long crew rest I decided to begin to research the nature of light.
This was a time in my service career when I was worried about losing my health and my flight pay. We had been flying many long hours each month and there had been some incidents in my 4,000 plus hours of flying which left me with some apprehension. There was almost never any time off at home and I had developed a stomach ulcer and some skin problems which were probably induced psychologically. The flight surgeon did not know of my problems and if I had told him he would have taken me off flying status. Flying status meant flight pay, but there was more to it than that. Flying was something that I enjoyed under "normal" circumstances and I did not want a boring desk job. My request to go back to school had been turned down. MATS needed navigators badly and the Air Force did not need physicists.
When I went into the library that day, I was looking forward to something new and different and I found it. Researching light immediately leads to the electron and the electron is a very strange little thing. At the end of the three-day crew rest I was a new person because the universe had changed for me. In my stumbling and ignorant way, I had found what Einstein had been looking for - the unified field theory. But it was nothing like mainstream physics wanted it to be, and probably should not be called a "field" theory.
When we returned to the states, I acquired copies of Einstein's latest work from Princeton and discovered that he had apparently been wary of the theory of relativity. In his old age, he was working along lines that would probably have led to the same "theory" that I had found, but he had not experienced the final revelation.
It has been over 38 years that we have been perfecting what I found. Others have helped along the way. Mart Gibson has been the most influential of them, acting as my partner in the endeavor and encouraging me to continue against a very adverse political climate. Today, we have a theory with an abundance of mathematical back-up material, physics that makes excellent sense, and consistency throughout. The discoveries in experimental physics through the years have only confirmed what we have. In fact, to me and a few other people it is no longer just a theory.
During this span of years, mainstream physicists have moved in a direction which has taken them farther and farther from the truth. Some of their discoveries are quite valid, but many of their conclusions have been wrong. The scrambled mess that has resulted is a vastly more complex puzzle than ever before because so much garbage is included with the truths.
Many intelligent people have concluded that it is best to throw it all away - to throw out the baby with the bath water. I do not concur. The results obtained by the experimental physicists should be treated with respect regardless of what the prevalent theories are. There may be times when data have been falsified, but generally the verified experiments are important and valid. The correct method in real science devoid of politics, is to discover as much as possible via honest experiments and then go where the information leads.
In 1965, anyone who mentioned ether seriously was considered a candidate for an asylum unless, of course, he were someone who worked with it such as a radio operator, a navigator, or an engineer. Ether had been proposed and given certain qualities which I found to be false. So when I began to work with advanced ether theory, the name "ether" was tainted. To avoid confusion with old obsolete ether theory, I gave the dynamic ether a new name. I began calling it "nether" after the mythical ancient Greek name for the underlying substance. Today the astrophycists, not able to cover up its presence any longer and wanting to refer to it in a way that would make it appear to be a new idea, have christened it "dark energy".
Nether theory evolved very carefully by building a firm foundation and adding only solid structure above it. In the course of the process, I found that much of mainstream physics was correct, but this was often true for reasons that were entirely different than previously supposed.
Electron spin was not quite correct and could not be properly explored by using the concept of a rotating solid body. Magnetism was very easily explained in nether theory and magnetism certainly existed as a force. But the idea then prevalent of finding a magnetic monopole was ludicrous. The expansion of the universe and red shift were very logical in nether theory, except for one thing - the expansion should have been accelerating. This did not necessarily imply a single big-bang creation, but it did imply a point from which the expansion began.
The supposed paradoxes of quantum mechanics such as the slit and EPR experiments are easily understood in nether theory. Far from paradoxical, they are very obvious consequences. In fact, most of quantum mechanics is correct though poorly understood, and the Copenhagen interpretation has been an adverse factor which has contributed to the confusion. Quantum chromodynamics (QCD) is correct but scarcely deserving of such a big name because it is another obvious effect when properly understood. Yet it was needed for a true understanding of quarks, gluons, and composite subatomic entities such as the proton. On the other hand, quantum electrodynamics (QED) is dead wrong in its assertion of the photon as a sort of particle and, in its present form, will eventually go the way of phlogiston theory.
Heisenberg's uncertainty principle is correct as to measured values, but in reality, position and momentum do have well defined simultaneous values. Our shortcomings have no effect on reality. The Pauli exclusion principle is quite logical in nether theory. Einstein's special theory of relativity is wrong, but there is relativity of a different kind (all things are relative to the ether) which causes similar equations to be valid.
The mass/energy equation, E = mc 2, is quite correct and easily understood in nether theory. Einstein did not actually know why it works.
Gravity lensing is an obvious consequence of gravity in nether theory, and gravity lensing very definitely does exist. The same is true of time dilation. A dynamic ether universe cannot exist without the consequence that we call time dilation (see the section in this site on time).
When reading the series called Behind Light's Illusion, it is best to read it through quickly at first to program the subconscious and to see how the parts relate to one another. Then go through it all very slowly while understanding the math. Remember that over thirty years of work has been compressed into seven little books. Nether theory may take a little longer to comprehend than algebra or chemistry.
If one is capable of absorbing slowly what he or she is reading, and if he or she begins with Book One of the series and continues to read the books in numerical order, the workings of the universe will begin to make perfect sense. If one has the necessary attention span and expanse of memory needed for the entire theory, his or her world will become much larger than it once was.
For those who do not choose to read the long version, the website might be helpful even though it was only intended to supplement the books.
Back - Main Menu - Next