Light Creates/Grows Latticework as it Propagates

Light grows latticework in the direction of its propagation, via its percolation, and then its refraction. When entanglement is involved, light creates a superlattice in the direction of propagation. This latticework is the result of the action of the percolation of light through lyotropic aether, as opposed to the subsequently refracted transverse light energies.

This is a better way to describe two phase or two mode light, than the way I have used in the past.  I’ve been describing two-factor light as a self aligning, self propagating effect, akin to the lyotropic crystal alignment that happens in LCD monitors.  But – it’s more than just an alignment – it’s literally the creation of a lattice framework in a way analogous to the well known elemental crystallography associated with physical chemistry.  It’s just that it happens in lyotropic aether as opposed to normal matter.

The magic angle of 1.1 degrees misalignment is what creates superlattices in the types of crystals used for generating entangled photons. The same 1.1 degree angle creates a superlattice in graphene, which subsequently leads to paramagnetism effects and to superconductance. So, light in transit is not necessarily a superlattice creator, but causes only lattice alignments when the magic angle is not involved.

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

.

Magnetic Attraction: Push, not Pull

One of the favorite memes that circulates in groups of people who adhere to energy theories involving lyotropic aether and such, is the meme of push vs. pull in electrodynamics. Once you buy into the idea of lyotropic aether, and superlattices formed within the medium, then you realize the potential that all force in the universe is push-force, and there is no such thing as attraction.

This would naturally extend to all things in the so-called electrodynamic realm: Energy transfer, magnetism, and dipole moments (the latter of which hold the matter universe together).  The idea is that superlattices form in energy paths and in atoms and in arrangements of atoms.  So, the dipole moments in a magnet, as an aggregate, cause a superlattice that has feedback equilibrium, and this equilibrium, in combination with the refractive index of the superlattice, causes a fold-back of the energy field around the magnet.  This amounts to a chain link that can seem to have attractive force for the next link, but instead has only push.

Key to understanding the push/no-pull theory is an understanding of two mode energy momentum transit, as in longitudinal percolation versus transverse refraction.  The dipole moments between atoms of molecules would work the same way, and we would say that atoms are bound to other atoms by the wrap-around electrodynamic effect of the superlattice, making “chain links” where each link is a push-force link.  These links altogether form the vertices of the crystallographically defined dipole moment binding-structures of not only matter, but of lyotropic aether as well.  Therefore, Einstein’s non-success at building a unifying theory was based on a less broad picture of things that he calculated as his input.  The additional pieces allow for unification of energy, gravity, so-called quantum entanglement, and matter interactions.

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

 

Atoms are Nested Super Lattice Spheres

Today I’m going to write down a bullet-pointed list of some recent thoughts, and try not to bring along any chaff …

  • Atoms are nested superlattice spheres. Each so-called orbital shell is a different geometry within the superlattice. Some geometries are more efficient (hence they hold more energy). Some of these superlattices are self-similar, resolving to ever smaller geometries, which is why they hold so much energy in spite of their size. It’s because the energy network is so large. An atom is really more like a capacitor or battery than it is like the thing that academia has painted for it.
  • There is no such thing as positive electric charge.  Other than as an abstraction, we could consider that there is no such thing as charge polarity: and instead there is only the presence or the absence of energy, and the direction of its flow. The polarity abstraction has served to conflate it with something that is real, when it is not.
  • All energy is initially scalar.  Tesla was correct.  But, due to the lyotropic aether, the scalar energy is channelized along percolation paths.  Due to the channelization, the individual scalar “rays” each have a vector, and can transform to refracted T-waves.
  • All energy momentum transit is a longitudinal percolation.  Longitudinal percolation creates a superlattice in lyotropic aether, which aligns the lyotropic aether, creating an impedance/aether discontinuity along the medium boundary of the superlattice.  This supports refraction for the secondary T-wave.
  • Nature’s mode is longitudinal, as in previous bullet point.  
  • Gravity is unrefracted energy percolation, coming from the surrounding universe. It is scalar in effect, even though the energy passes through myriad percolation channels in lyotropic aether.

I should explain the assertion that there are no charges – at least a little bit. We’ve had charge terminology wrong since Benjamin Franklin guessed that the electrified clouds were negative and the ground positive. Of course, it’s really the opposite of that, but my point doesn’t have anything to do with positive being negative.

Energy is energy. It doesn’t itself have any polarity. It’s just a stress-force momentum in the aether. So, we really only have one thing, or we don’t have it. We have energy, or we don’t. Dipoles have reflexive polarity, but this polarity is “having energy” versus “not having energy” – so we have only positive “energy” (we call it negative, thanks to Franklin) – and then on the other side of the dipole we have “no energy” (or more likely “lesser” energy) – and we call it negative polarity.  The idea of a center voltage of zero is simply a convention built out of the way they decided to build power transformers, with center taps.  It’s entirely artificial, and nature doesn’t really have +/- charges in it.  It has energy, and alternately, no or lesser energy.  Like water, energy flows from where it is to where it isn’t.

The vast majority of the energy in the universe is of the scalar form, albeit it comes with the overlay of the channelization effects of lyotropic aether percolation.  We see none of it, because nothing akin to “charge” appears to us except when there is an interaction with mass that results in what we perceive (or our instruments perceive) as charge.

Nonetheless, unrefracted percolated (scalar) energy has an impact on individual atoms with its force, even as it does not affect the so-called “charge” exhibited by those atoms. So, it ends up being an undetected mechanical force that is responsible for gravity.

How do we detect this energy? We have a number of means to measure the effects of gravity, but how do we more closely measure the gravity itself?  Unrefracted energy percolation is responsible for so-called quantum entanglement.  So, a device that measures how much quantum entanglement happens per unit area (say, by measuring the quantum echoes between two quantum lenses) – we might more directly measure the “gravity”.  A candidate material for the lenses would be, of course, graphene.

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.