I’ve spent quite a few posts pontificating about the larger scale machinations of the aether, and have written about various phenomenon that seemingly could be associated with it. I’ve boiled the entire universe down to a universal elemental aether with ripples on it – ripples that we can, in an abstract sense, call energy.
But what of the atomic realm? If the action of free energy in the aether is so simple to describe, then the atoms that comprise matter must also follow a simple description. We are moulding the universe of a single elemental material: the aether.
Everything turns. Like the lyrics in the song from the sixties, everything turns. Magnets have their vortex swirls, weather systems have their turning hurricanes, atoms have their orbiting electrons (though “orbit” is a debatable term). But you get the point. There is a pattern in these swirls, and the aether must support them prodigiously. When we look at magnetic force, we must be looking at a house that follows the aetheric foundations under it.
We have the aether perturbations/ripples/energy-abstractions of movement and momentum (some call this space), and we have everything else in the rest of the vast aether – all of the perturbanceless/rippleless parts of it (some call the latter counter space). What separates the two are aether discontinuities – changes in the medium’s properties that are boundary conditions of perturbances, and that reflect similarly to an impedance discontinuity. The idea of moving ripples on the aether (in the case of both slow and fast light) – seem simple to understand as an abstraction for energy. But what of the atomic nature of matter? Can its parts also be moulded into the simple model?
What separates the two are aether discontinuities – changes in the medium’s properties that are boundary conditions of perturbances
I have the feeling that the aether underlies all of the universe. What we perceive as energy moves (really it transfers) across the aether, but occasionally it gets closed off. Perhaps there is some mechanism by which regions of the aether become closed off from the rest of the aether. Perhaps a wall is created by circulating fast light, which here and there in the early universe was found in sufficient strengths to produce aether boundary conditions in the swirl – aether discontinuities (like the impedance discontinuities of electrical theory). Perhaps these discontinuities are really what traps the energy inside of an atom. Perhaps the electrons really do not orbit at all – and instead reflect from the boundary conditions of the closed-off regions of aether.
What could sustain the aether discontinuity? When energy transits the aether, it produces a real-time discontinuity as it goes. Could such a discontinuity be a semi-permanent thing in the case of energy that has been walled-off into a mass of matter? Such a wall would need to be very dense and very efficient. Let’s say the modulus of elasticity for the aether is such that fast light does not have infinite speed. This seems reasonable, even though we have no proof for or against such a thing. That means the elastic action of the aether takes time to happen. That would also mean that the reverse process would take time to happen. Would this idea support an almost infinitely strong and reflective wall for atomic containment?
And if it did provide such a thing, could it be used to contain fusion reactions? The discontinuity wall need not hold back the whole of the energy of a nuclear weapon. The fusion reaction of a single hydrogen atom produces only a trillion’th of a joule of released energy. It’s the chain reaction that makes a nuclear weapon go boom in a big way. Yes – it’s much more energy than the oxidation reaction of say – gasoline – but it’s not the whole warhead in a single atom – not even close. It takes trillions of atoms in a chain reaction to effect Hiroshima-like damages. Someone suggested that the fusing of a thousand hydrogen atoms would likely not be felt on the tip of your finger.
So, using discontinuities to hold a fusion reaction is seemingly something that is in feasible scale.
To be continued …
Note: the author is a writer on technical subjects in some areas, of novels, and of other literature, but does not have any formal credentials related to the medical field, or in physics. Thus, this all constitutes an opinion of what might be possible, based on his own hobby-level knowledge quests.