Elysium

More
21 years 6 months ago #3904 by Larry Burford
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>[MV]
Any ideas how the size of elysons compares to the size of nucleons? With the theoretical calculated mass of elysons, is there a whole number of elysons that can form up to create nucleons? - MV
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

In another thread Dr Van Flandern has mentioned a recent experiment that could possiblly be the detection of an elyson side effect similar to Brownian motion. I'll see if I can find it again and post a link here.

Regards,
LB

See Meta Science, Gravition Detection thread
Post by TVF, Feb 19 @ 16:47:55

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
21 years 6 months ago #5146 by MarkVitrone
Replied by MarkVitrone on topic Reply from Mark Vitrone
Do the elysons have charge? - MV

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
21 years 6 months ago #5258 by tvanflandern
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>Do the elysons have charge? - MV<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

Elysons are like air or water molecules. They are the constituents for the light-carrying medium. Being perhaps 20 orders of magnitude smaller than nucleons, the question of integer numbers of elysons in anything is moot. Elysons are to nucleons as nucleons are to a mole of material.

"Charge" is apparently the property of certain particles to carry around elyson atmospheres with them. The more mass a particle has, the broader and denser is its elyson atmosphere. Then when two identical particles try to approach one another, their dense atmospheres interact first, and act like a soft, springy substance that compresses, then repels the particles as the compressed atmospheres rebound.

So in answer to your question, elysons do not <i>have</i> charge. Rather, they <i>are</i> charge.

This might raise a host of additional questions. However, the MM has not been developed in this area, and is presently unable to answer questions at any deeper level. I hope that situation will be remedied in the future. But doing so will require collaboration with someone intimately familiar with the actual experiments behind all our knowledge of quantum effects, as opposed to today's <i>interpretation</i> of those experiments. -|Tom|-

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
21 years 6 months ago #3924 by dholeman
Replied by dholeman on topic Reply from Don Holeman
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>

"Charge" is apparently the property of certain particles to carry around elyson atmospheres with them. The more mass a particle has, the broader and denser is its elyson atmosphere. Then when two identical particles try to approach one another, their dense atmospheres interact first, and act like a soft, springy substance that compresses, then repels the particles as the compressed atmospheres rebound.

<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>
I think the concept of elysium is the most fascinating part of the Meta Model. I'm curious why you've settled on this 'cloud' model for charge as opposed to, say, one analogous to that of pushing gravity where the effect of charge might be attributed to (selective?) shadowing effects? In particular, I'm wondering how you can extrapolate properties of the 'elyson cloud' around an electron that would cause the electron to cruise along a copper highway or even, more basically, orbit around a nucleus.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
21 years 6 months ago #5148 by MarkVitrone
Replied by MarkVitrone on topic Reply from Mark Vitrone
I was familiar with the concept of elysons being charge in the sense of the atmosphere model. The connection between gravity and EM could then be extrapolated from this idea. Perhaps there needs to be a certain density of elysium necessary for light propagation (just as sound decreases as you apply a vacuum to air until sound fails to propagate), in the bell jar there is still a negligible yet detectable amount of air. Once again I find myself gravitating (no pun) to Einstein's photoelectric effect. The quanta of energy required to make electrons 'jump' to the next energy level depends on a number of factors but boils down to an all or nothing effect. I mean to point out the observation that it is harder for an electron to become excited the farther it is away from the nucleus. Perhaps the small dense nucleus allows for compaction of the elysium very close to the nucleus with inverse square dilution as the elysium thins farther from the nucleus. (of course all of these distances are extremly small). Maybe there is an analog to redshift at these tiny distances that makes its effect felt in the behavior of atoms and electrons in EM applications. I point this out because we can measure atomic level activities and like BB, many of the concepts are archaic and have been preserved politically.

Perhaps electrons exhibit wave particle duality based on elysium density. When travelling in the denser medium the electron is wavelike as it is around an atom, when the elysium is more even, the electron is a particle since propagation in waveform is more difficult due to elysium proximity?

The elyson is ~20 orders of magnitude smaller than a nucleon with the size of the electron being ~ 4 - 7 x 10^-13 m. The electron is not too small to see the elyson albeit small in comparison. At this scale, wouldn't waves act not like but the same as air molecules and sound waves? I am not sure if I am making sense, this is a stab... -MV

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
21 years 6 months ago #5259 by tvanflandern
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>[dholeman]: I'm curious why you've settled on this 'cloud' model for charge as opposed to, say, one analogous to that of pushing gravity where the effect of charge might be attributed to (selective?) shadowing effects?<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

Like charges repel. My first thought was that protons, for example, were sources of gravitons, which would allow them to repel. But it did not explain repulsion between electrons yet attraction between protons and electrons. Also, gravitons were far too weak a force if extrapolated to the quantum scale. In short, gravitons alone did not explain charge. Even more basically, why should all protons and all electrons be identical? Sameness of properties for each discrete entity is a wave characteristic. So how do we explain that particles also have some wave characteristics?

I try not to guess answers to questions such as these because that is inductive, a process frequently wrong. I was sure that, if MM was a sound model, it would eventually show the right path. Well, MM had already shown a need for both elysons and gravitons to explain all gravitational phenomena. And one of the predictions of the Le Sage-type gravity model in MM is that sufficiently dense matter will start to have gravitational shielding, not just shadowing.

One of the characteristics of shielding is that density becomes a factor. Most matter is so porous that most gravitons fly through without effect, and are "wasted" in that they contribute nothing to gravitational force. But if the body density for a given mass is made greater, fewer gravitons are wasted, so gravitational force is stronger. This effect is too slight to be noticed at ordinary densities. But matter density gets dramatically greater at smaller scales. Eventually, it must become so great that nearly 100% of gravitons become effective in producing force. Such a force would be formidable.

But we already know that elysons are influenced by gravitons, and the elysium becomes denser near large masses. It follows that elysium would become super-dense near particles that can absorb most of the incoming gravitons. The implied pressure and density of elysium near such particles might even be great enough to induce a change of state, like water to ice.

Applying these deductions to the quantum world, we infer that protons might be small enough for high-efficiency graviton absorption. That density need only be high enough to produce a change of state for the surrounding elysium. We further presume that the elysium changes into a spongy state that has high elasticity. Then we would get the basic properties seen for protons. Densities great enough for a second change of state might explain electrons. So the wave properties of quantum particles are caused by their dense elysium atmospheres, which govern most close interactions. Collisions are secondary in importance unless relative speeds are very high.

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>In particular, I'm wondering how you can extrapolate properties of the 'elyson cloud' around an electron that would cause the electron to cruise along a copper highway or even, more basically, orbit around a nucleus.<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

MM does not yet have a model for the electron. So questions of detail cannot yet be answered. But perhaps, from these generalities, you can see some possibilities. -|Tom|-

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.368 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum