Universe Tensile Strength: Could the universe spin like a solid object if it has tensile strength, as Charles Chandler thinks galaxies do, due to plasma attraction?
Gravity: Do you consider gravity a centrifugal force?
- No. It's an expansion, or acts like expansion [due to universe spins].
Galactic Filaments: (July 8, '13) As shown at Alternative Science Studies (http://qdl.scs-inc.us/?top=9670) plasma in the universe tends to form filaments. Can you explain that? If you can, you might get EU proponents to consider your model more carefully.
Cosmic B-Photon Locations: If 95% of quanta are recycled as free B-photons, what percentage of these B-photons are within each of these: stars; planetoids; and space?
Titan's Atmosphere: You say Mars is too small to ever have had an atmosphere. And Earth's atmosphere comes from the Earth itself. I suppose Titan's atmosphere comes from Titan. How could it accumulate such a dense atmosphere when it's smaller than Mars? Can a gas giant fission or eject a body with a large atmosphere? Is it likely that Titan is a young object? And what about Venus?
Photon Attraction to Matter: In your Pilot Waves paper at http://milesmathis.com/pilot.pdf you said: "Charge [or photon field] density is increased by the presence of other matter, since concentrations of matter tend to attract photons. But even nearly empty space will have photon traffic, as we know. What we don't seem to know is the baseline density of that traffic. It is far above what we have thought. Because most photons are dark to us, and because we have no way to measure photon traffic in the absence of ions, we have not understood that this baseline is very high. I have shown how to calculate this baseline straight from the fundamental charge, showing that what we call dark matter is actually photonic matter." 1. Since you generally say there is no attractive force, how can matter attract photons? If matter is like a sump pump, spraying out photons, the photon density in the location of matter would be reduced, making a local low pressure photon field. So it seems that the surrounding field would have higher photon pressure and the pressure would force photons toward the low pressure matter. Is that the mechanics of the "attraction" you meant? Shouldn't this higher pressure have a measurable effect on gravity and the photonic charge field in the outward spray of photons from matter? 2. Earlier in this paper you seemed to define photons as non-matter, then here you refer to them as photon matter. Shouldn't you explain this to your readers?
Electron & Proton Numbers & Repulsion: Why aren't there many more electrons than protons and why is hydrogen in space mostly neutral, since it seems it should be negatively ionized, if there are more electrons than protons, because protons are made from electrons? Why do electrons repel electrons as strongly as protons repel protons (assuming they do), if protons are much larger?
Neutron Decay: Each neutron outside of a nucleus decays into a proton and an electron within about 12 minutes. Why and how does it do so? What prevents decay inside a nucleus?
Alpha Particle Neutrons: (July 8, '13) It seems that most of the neutrons in your model of atomic structure reside in pairs within "alpha particles". But it seems that some do not, such as in oxygen. I think your oxygen model has 3 horizontal alphas in the center (consisting of 6 p and 6n) and 2 vertical protons at the top and bottom poles. Where would the remaining two neutrons fit in? And what would prevent each neutron from decaying?
Similar Photon Model: Isn't this photon model pretty close to yours? http://www.worldnpa.org/site/abstract/?abstractid=7098&~
- Somewhat, but cycloids need to be replaced with stacked spins etc.
Stacked Spins: In your Superposition paper, you said regarding stacked spins: "Let us say you have the Earth spinning about the x-axis, and you give the center of the Earth a constant velocity in the y-direction. Next, we add an end-over-end spin in this same y-direction." How can there be an end-over-end spin around a point on an object's surface, if its center of mass is not at that point?
- When a photon is hit by another photon, it can't go faster than light, so it tends to stack spins instead around the point where it gets hit.
Structure & Motion Illustration: Can we get an illustration of photons, electrons and protons with detailed internal motions and structure, including the paths of recycled photons?
Photon Motion Within Protons: What are the rate and pressure of photon motions during both proton inflow and outflow? How can the photon in a proton go fast enough to run circles around recycling photons in order to herd them into the emission disk (or the poles)? Must the recycling photons slow down inside protons and then get reaccelerated to light speed during emission? Why don't recycling photons disrupt the internal proton quantum motions? Is it because of the increased mass and momentum of the proton quantum in its stacked spins? If so, how can stacked spins increase its mass? Or is it because the photons get slowed down inside protons that they don't disrupt quanta? If so, how would they get slowed down? Would it be partly by being protected from external charge field pressure?
Ions Emit Photons; Molecules Don't: In your paper on Atmospheric Pressure you said: "Molecules do not radiate many photons, and this is because the electrons in the shells are blocking radiation from the nuclei. Molecules are mostly neutral, as we know, so few photons are escaping the electron/proton exchange. But with ions, this is not the case. I have shown that electrons also emit the charge field, so negative ions will be creating a charge field, not just positive ions. Both negative and positive ions are emitting a positive, real, bombarding field of photons. Therefore, when ions encounter the charge field of the Earth, they feel a greater repulsion than [do] molecules, and must go higher in the atmosphere." So I'd like to see how the B-photons get recycled within neutral molecules, without emitting many photons outside the molecule.
Proton Emission Disks: What are the radii of emission disks of electrons and protons and wouldn't they vary with cosmic location and the amount of recycling photons? And how are the disks able to function as rigid parts of hadrons/leptons? Is the model like that of a circle of machine guns spinning around shooting bullets out equatorially with respect to the spin?
Magnetopause Paper Error: In your Magnetopause paper at milesmathis.com/pause.html? it looks like you may have misunderstood a passage from Wikipedia about ions. You said: "Let's look at how Wikipedia uses plasma to explain Solar Wind exclusion. On the page entitled "Magnetosphere", we are told of the Solar Wind that: Its composition resembles that of the Sun-about 95% of the ions are protons, about 4% helium nuclei, with 1% of heavier matter ... and enough electrons to keep charge neutrality. - See a problem there? You cannot maintain charge neutrality with 99% positive charge. That leaves less than 1% negative charge, and <1% cannot balance >99%." I think their use of the word "ions" was meant as "positive ions" and that the solar wind is actually of equal parts positive ions and electrons. So their 95% protons, 4% helium nuclei and 1% heavier matter referred only to the positive ions, I think.
Please answer the 20 Questions below:
These are 20 major points from Mathis' theory, which I'd like people to rate as:
P (probable >70%);
M (maybe or possible 30-70%); or
I (implausibleFour people filled out the questionnaire. The answers are shown below each statement. In some cases the statements probably weren't understood properly. The first and third respondents are likely supporters of Mathis. The second and fourth are likely doubters.
1. EM Waves: - EM sine wave motion is approximately the manner in which photons travel in empty space.
P, P, M, P2. Photon Mass: - Photons must have radius and mass in order to have any effect on matter.
P, I, P, P3. Heat: - Heat is IR photons emitted by all matter.
P, P, P, P4. Photon Density: - The field of photons is dense everywhere there is matter and less dense where there is mostly only starlight.
P, I, P, P5. Charge: - The repulsive force between like subatomic particles is caused by emission or radiation of smaller particles that have radius and mass, photons being the best candidate.
P, I, P, P6. Photon Radiation: - All matter receives and radiates photons.
P, P, P, P7. Heat Capacity: - Heat capacity of elements varies because of the way particle structure of different elements receive and radiate photons.
P, P, P, P8. Element Properties: - Photonic radiation, called the charge field, in elements determines their conductivity, magnetic properties, chemical reactions, density etc.
P, I, P, P9. Electricity: - The charge field moves electrons and ions in electric currents, wireless currents and stellar winds.
P, I, M, P10. Atmospheres: - Photonic radiation, the charge field, levitates gases and ions in atmospheres and ionospheres.
P, I, P, M11. Plasmaspheres: - Planetary radiation produces plasmaspheres and magnetospheres within solar or stellar wind.
P, I, P, I12. Solar Wind: - Solar radiation produces the solar wind.
P, I, M, I13. Blackbody Radiation: - Blackbody radiation is photonic radiation.
P, M, P, P14. Comets: - Curved comet tails are curved by the magnetic effect of solar photonic radiation due to photon spin.
M, I, P, M15. Unified Field: - The formula for gravity includes the charge field formula.
P, I, M, P16. Orbits: - Elliptical or eccentric and normal orbits are caused by opposing forces between gravity and the charge field.
P, M, P, P17. Planetary Repulsion: - Stellar and planetary charge fields are repulsive and tend to prevent collisions.
P, M, P, P18. Trojan Asteroids: - Jupiter's Trojan asteroids are kept at a distance from Jupiter by its repulsive charge field.
M, M, P, P19. Axial Tilts: - Planetary axial tilts are caused by interaction between their charge fields.
P, I, M, P,20. Optical Equivalence Attraction: - Small bodies are able to move through the charge field closer to the primary than are larger bodies, so, when smaller ones are in higher orbits or locations, they tend to move toward the primary, but risk collision with any larger ones that may be in lower orbits or locations, as likely happened to a small planet that encountered Mars in the past, which became the asteroid belt, and Mars likely encountered Earth, causing other catastrophes here in the past.
P, -, M, MANSWERS
Four people filled out the questionnaire. The answers are shown below each statement. In some cases the statements probably weren't understood properly. The first and third respondents are likely supporters of Mathis. The second and fourth are likely doubters.
Least to Most Plausible: Here are the statements in order of increasing probability.
12. Solar Wind: - Solar radiation produces the solar wind.
P, I, M, I
11. Plasmaspheres: - Planetary radiation produces plasmaspheres and magnetospheres within solar or stellar wind.
P, I, P, I
14. Comets: - Curved comet tails are curved by the magnetic effect of solar photonic radiation due to photon spin.
M, I, P, M
9. Electricity: - The charge field moves electrons and ions in electric currents, wireless currents and stellar winds.
P, I, M, P
10. Atmospheres: - Photonic radiation, the charge field, levitates gases and ions in atmospheres and ionospheres.
P, I, P, M
15. Unified Field: - The formula for gravity includes the charge field formula.
P, I, M, P
19. Axial Tilts: - Planetary axial tilts are caused by interaction between their charge fields.
P, I, M, P,
20. Optical Equivalence Attraction: - Small bodies are able to move through the charge field closer to the primary than are larger bodies, so, when smaller ones are in higher orbits or locations, they tend to move toward the primary, but risk collision with any larger ones that may be in lower orbits or locations, as likely happened to a small planet that encountered Mars in the past, which became the asteroid belt, and Mars likely encountered Earth, causing other catastrophes here in the past.
P, -, M, M
2. Photon Mass: - Photons must have radius and mass in order to have any effect on matter.
P, I, P, P
4. Photon Density: - The field of photons is dense everywhere there is matter and less dense where there is mostly only starlight.
P, I, P, P
5. Charge: - The repulsive force between like subatomic particles is caused by emission or radiation of smaller particles that have radius and mass, photons being the best candidate.
P, I, P, P
8. Element Properties: - Photonic radiation, called the charge field, in elements determines their conductivity, magnetic properties, chemical reactions, density etc.
P, I, P, P
18. Trojan Asteroids: - Jupiter's Trojan asteroids are kept at a distance from Jupiter by its repulsive charge field.
M, M, P, P
1. EM Waves: - EM sine wave motion is approximately the manner in which photons travel in empty space.
P, P, M, P
13. Blackbody Radiation: - Blackbody radiation is photonic radiation.
P, M, P, P
16. Orbits: - Elliptical or eccentric and normal orbits are caused by opposing forces between gravity and the charge field.
P, M, P, P
17. Planetary Repulsion: - Stellar and planetary charge fields are repulsive and tend to prevent collisions.
P, M, P, P3. Heat: - Heat is IR photons emitted by all matter.
P, P, P, P
6. Photon Radiation: - All matter receives and radiates photons.
P, P, P, P
7. Heat Capacity: - Heat capacity of elements varies because of the way particle structure of different elements receive and radiate photons.
P, P, P, P1. Stacked spins seem to violate the first law of motion, i.e. straight line motion; the theory that photons stack spins on collision because of not being able to exceed light speed in any single dimension seems inadequate, because it seems that the photon could only get hit from the front or side, which would not make it exceed light speed.
2. The UFT gravity equation analysis seems incomplete, because, if gravity is simple acceleration, while the charge field is a force, or pressure, it doesn't seem that a force or pressure can oppose an acceleration, as the acceleration requires a mass to have force. So I don't see how the UFT equation can have gravity taking just volume and be just acceleration, unless the volume turns it into a Force of L^4/T^4.Light in Space: Someone says: I think what I most would like an answer from Miles about is the night vision equipment, and if it would work in space. I got only 2 responses from over a dozen emails I sent, one from the manufacturer of an eyepiece that fits a regular telescope, and anther from Phil Plait, who says he doesn't know anything about the night vision equipment, but that if it works at all, it should work in space. Nobody else, including NASA, replied. Now, the night vision devices detect an IR photon, and the sensor produces an electron from that photon, but if there are no photons out there, it shouldn't work. And seeing as NASA makes no mention of augmented vision systems in space, I think it pretty safe to say that they don't work, which means there is something drastically wrong with our models of what light is, and how it travels in the vacuum. NASA is not going to 'come clean' about this whole subject without a lot of arm twisting though.
Charge Field & Electric Field: Tom Burwell's blog post has this statement: "Mathis's system preserves c also, by hypothesizing that all matter generates an electric field, in much the same way that all matter generates a gravitational field."
I haven't noticed Mathis ever saying all matter generates an electric field. He always says all matter generates a charge field. In his first axial tilt paper at http://milesmathis.com/tilt.html, he says: "The magnetic field is orthogonal to both the charge field and the electric field". This seems to prove that he regards the electric field as different from the charge field.
On the other hand, Mathis says in his paper at http://milesmathis.com/weak2.html that: "The electric field is carried by the linear momenta of the real photons, but the magnetic field is carried by the angular momenta." In this case it sounds like he's saying the electric field is parallel to the charge field, while in the other it's perpendicular. I guess that's a possible contradiction that needs to be corrected.
Proton-Proton Repulsion Variation: (from CC) If repulsion between protons etc depends on their intake and emission of photons, why doesn't the repulsion, called the Coulomb force, decrease with decreasing temperature down to absolute zero?
Photon Mass 19x Other Matter: Mathis often says total photon mass is 19 times that of other matter, as per the Dark Matter paper. More often it seems he says matter recycles 19 times its own mass per second. There's an infinity of difference between the two statements, so it seems that one of them must be wrong. If so, which is it? If not, how could there be such a coincidence?
Preventing Planetoid Collisions
How strongly do small outer planetoids (i.e., planets, moons, asteroids, comets) tend to move inward below the orbits of larger ones?
What formulae will tell us what these forces are and their timelines?
When will the following planetoids approach these orbits?
Mars to Earth's orbit?
Asteroids to Earth's orbit?
Saturn to Jupiter's?
Uranus and Neptune to Saturn's?
Pluto and Kuipers (i.e. Kuiper belt objects) to Neptune's?
What can be done to stabilize planetoidal orbits?
Can small ones be safely moved inward past larger ones?
Could their orbits be made highly elliptical and extra-ecliptical to get them past large ones, then be circularized?
What could ellipsize and circularize orbits and put them out of the ecliptic during passage?
Could asteroids be gathered together to make them larger?
Won't any collection of planetoids more than 200 miles in diameter condense into one body?
Could they be gathered together on Mars or Jupiter?
Or is it better to have lots of small planetoids where they are, for research, resources, inhabitation etc?
Could Mars be safely moved into Jupiter or into an outer orbit there?
Making Planetoids Habitable
What would be need to make Mars habitable?
Could Venus be made habitable by moving icy asteroids onto it?Neutron Stability
Mathis says neutrons have a slightly different spin pattern than do protons and that the spin pattern changes to that of a proton when a positron collides with the neutron. The collision also transforms the positron to an electron. (The spins are what produce the wave patterns characteristic of EM radiation.) Is the neutron stable inside an atom because the atom shooting out charge photons keeps positrons away.Proton Stability
If the neutron is unstable outside the atom because of positron collisions, shouldn't protons likewise be unstable because of electron collisions? Or is it stable for the same reason that atoms are, because the proton emits photons to keep other particles away, whereas neutrons emit very little photonic charge and are thus prone to collisions?Neutronium
Might there be a process that could condense neutrons into neutronium, which is theorized to be the core of pulsars or neutron stars? I think in some versions of neutronium theory only the surface would be unstable, so the neutronium would decay very slowly from the outside inward. What about that?"Is the neutron stable inside an atom because the atom shooting out charge photons keeps positrons away."
I think this is a reasonable explanation. The emitted charge field of the greater atomic structure 'shields' the minimally emitting Neutron. on its own, the Neutron has little emission to knock any rogue particles from a collision course. To me, thise explains why free neutrons decay within about 15 min.
"If the neutron is unstable outside the atom because of positron collisions, shouldn't protons likewise be unstable because of electron collisions?"
It seems that stability is tied directly to the emitted charge field of the particle itself. The more charge it emits, the greater its ability to protect itself and thus remain stable.
"Might there be a process that could condense neutrons into neutronium, which is theorized to be the core of pulsars or neutron stars?"
It would have to be shown that such condensation could occur with a charge field through-put. As Miles explains it is the charge channels that determine the greater nuclear structure; but with minimal charge through a neutron, I'm not sure any condensation would be stable for any length of time. Its an interesting idea, I just never have bought into the 'neutron star' concept. Seems like to much fantasy to cover a hole in a gravity-only theory.
tharkun