LogoforMountainManGraphics,Australia

Impulse Engineering

Questions & Answers on Aether
by Ross Tessien

Web Publication by Mountain Man Graphics, Australia - Southern Autumn '97

Date: 4 Mar 1997 04:29:32 GMT
From: tessien@oro.net (Ross Tessien)
Organization: Impulse Engineering, Inc.
Newsgroups: sci.physics, sci.astro, alt.sci.physics.new-theories
Subject: Re: Conference on the Fundamental Structure and Mechanisms of the Universe

[Editorial Note: Thanks to Louis Savain for the questions]:

> In article <331a3f1b.19174871@news.earthlink.net>, savainl@earthlink.net wrote:

> What is the basis for the properties of this fluid. The problem
> with the "everything is a medium" hypothesis is that, nothing can be
> reduced past the medium. You can reduce from matter to particles to
> waves and finally to the medium and there, the explanations stop.
> The medium is unfathomable. No bueno, IMO.

This is not true. You can study the acoustic structures that arise in the fluid in a lot of ways. Just like you can study a smoke ring vortex, or you can study how sound propogates or how waves move across the ocean. In sonoluminescence, (SL), you can study how spherical standing waves resonate. All in a medium.

But what makes the whole thing really work is only apparent after you work with the summation of the structures that the waves will take on after you fill the universe with a lot of SL like sub atomic particles. What you find out is that they bump each other into the local acoustic nodes just like the pendulums of Hugyens phase and frequency locked together (that is a fluid mechanical coupling too, due to the air motions being induced by the two coupled oscillators).

When you grasp that, you all of a sudden see, "spacetime".

>> You don't get to assume particles exist, you must derive their existence
>> from certain specifica ways that the fluid moves. ie, standing waves in
>> my theories case.

> Fine but what is the medium?

A rose by any other name, Aether I prefer. You can use "the unknown substance that is fluctuating to induce Quantum Vacuum Fluctuations.

>> Another thing is that with a continuous fluid, you only work with one
>> force mechanism, period, that's it. No particles are assumed, none of the
>> forces we currently use are assumed, and the only properties are of
>> conservation of aether (in my theory anyway), and compressibility. From
>> that you will find that the aether seems to undergo a change of state, so
>> I can tell you that its nature is of a vapor that is near saturation, and
>> that given sufficient amplification of pressure at the same temperature,
>> it will condense. But note that this is a highly pressurized thing in an
>> ocean that is of lower pressure.

> This type of pressure hypothesis has always bothered me. If the
> medium is a uniform fluid, what is keeping the high pressure areas
> (particles, or standing waves?) from dissipating in to the fluid?

I never said it was a uniform pressure fluid, but it is approximately so in flat spacetime if you ignore pressure variances of spacetime itself. but in essence, there is no region in the universe that is calm or without motion. If there were, that region would not have the qualities we know as space or time. It would just be aether.

And, as for the last part, nothing precludes aether from flowing out of high pressure regions and out to lower pressure regions. It is this tendency that leads to particles interacting whenever possible such that aether is emitted from their standing waves in what we call "exothermic" reactions which are mass emitting. Thus, this tendency, and the dropping pressure of the universe due to expansion, lead to the property of "entropy".

> Also you would need a frictionless fluid, i.e., perpetual motion to
> keep the waves moving.

Or an energy source. Exothermic reactions are, in my model, aether emitting, or in terms you know, mass emitting and thus space, creating. ie, the substance of space itself must be flowing out of the sun if I am correct. Now, think of the sun as a fluidized bed of particles out of which aether emitted in the center is flowing. You would think you would get a pressure drop at the surface as it reaches the unobstructed outside space wouldn't you? Well, what do you get right there? The transition zone from the chromosphere to the corona where the temp climbs a thousand fold despite there being no energy source.

> The more important question is, what is maintaining the pressure of this fluid?
> Is there a container of some sort?
> I just cannot imagine an infinitely large, pressurized medium.
> Infinities bother me.

The universe as a whole, must be a small part of a very much larger structure if this theory is correct. But, I have no singularities in either the big bang or in black holes. So, take you pick.

I wind up with a highly compressed core of aether condensate that forms in a sort of hydraulic jump and condensation at the center of a black hole due to the kinetic convergent flow of aether into that region. Thus, because it is highly pressurized, it must eventually explode or flow out again.

Two forms are, as jets, (see AGN and Quasar web pages, and I can provide some or just search for Alan Bridles home page for quasar images and their jets), or as an all at once breach of confinement, aka the big bang.

That leads to a spherical expansion and boiling of the aether condensate. The droplets that remain in the late stages of that inertially confined expasion and vaporization will be confined in the acoustic nodes inside that expanding ball. Today we call the expanding vapor ball, the "universe". And we call the remaining droplets, "matter". And we call the acoustic structure that confines the droplets, "spacetime".

>> So automatically, you wind up with "force fields"
>> from simple acoustic wave structures.

> Sure, but again, what is the medium? Fluids do not have
> properties for no reason. The *what* of anything consists of its
> properties, i.e, its descriptive characteristics. The properties of
> an object are, IMO, attributes that must be kept and maintained by the
> object. If your medium is infinitely divisible, it must have an
> infinite number of properties. That, to me, is impossible.

Well, you work with them all the time in QM. So I don't think it should be so surprising. The medium, again, is aether, or whatever name you wish to assign. The properties I have discovered are;

>> The tricky part is working out what a whole universe of these critters
>> will do and how their waves will all sum together in some particular
>> region of that ocean of aether. And the answer is, they will sum to a
>> manifold we call, "spacetime".

> My views on spacetime are have coalesced over the years to this:
> there is no such beast. If your "spacetime" is similar to the
> classical spacetime, i.e., if space is measured in length units and
> time is measured in seconds, there definitely is no such thing.

Space is a measure of how many wave crests you have passed moving from here to there, assuming that you froze the spacetime manifolds motions. Time is a measure of how many wave crests have passed by your location in the manifold, assuming you remained motionless and did not move through "space"

With the spacetime manifold in motion, you can only count wavecrests and you cannot know if they correspond to time, or to space. Thus, you can only measure translation through "spacetime".

> IMO, that in itself is part of the problem. My view of our search
> to understand the "fundamental structure of the universe" stems from
> my conviction that the best approach is one of ever finer
> reductionism. This is based on the notion that, as you reduce, things
> get simpler and simpler, until you get to the most fundamental level.
> I don't see that happening with continuous structures. Such
> structures are the most complex things imaginable. Their complexity
> is irreducible by definition. This is bothersome because most of us
> correctly view complexity as arising from simplicity. Not the other
> way around.

Then you have not studied complexity theory which gives rise to simple geometries out of otherwise chaotic motions. Fractals try to dive into this too.

And while you are correct that it is difficult to say the least to dive into these notions, they do become manageable after you get used to them. In fact, if this were not the case, I would not be writing this today. I can see it in my head, all it takes is an open mind and some effort. (well, and a couple years for me!)

> And what could be simpler than discrete particles with discrete properties?

Look at my list of aether properties:

Now, look at a partial list of current theories;

Now, none of those are derived properties. They all inter-relate back and forth around in circles. And our universe is found shinging out in the behaviors. It takes two theories to put the pieces all together.

Contrast that with the four properties of the aether above and then I would have to add the following constants;

So, that is all you get with this theory (I don't think I forgot anything). The first two properties give you c as Maxwell already derived. And the condensation pressure gives you the Planck length since that is the scale of the electron non linearity and thus gives rise to the fundamental scale of spacetime itself because the particles are underdamped oscillators that get stuck in the acoustic nodes, and thus they are the reason the nodes are there in the first place. ie, you need to amplify the density of the aether up to the degree at which the aether collapses non linearly to a greater density.

A spherically convergent standing wave leads to a fourth power amplification of the energy density of the aether (ie the sum of the amplification of the KE and PE of the aether as you converge into the interior of a particle.) Simple conservation of aether gives this.

The viscosity is the tendency for that pressure information to be damped from the original phase angles and frequencies, to the local inflows and out flows of the aether in the very innermost regions of the standing wave.

This is like resonant quantum black holes discussed by Hawking as best I can figure, and the information lost is frequency and phase angle information if it is out of match with the particle under consideration. that damping leads to all forces, gravity being a damping of frequency information, and other forces being related to damping of phase angle information of the incident wave energy. Frequency damping can only repulse, while phase information can induce either attractions or repulsions.

> From a vast multi-dimensional ocean of these
> simple entities, I can imagine the birth of complex worlds and
> universes.

The same is true of organized acoustic standing waves in a manifold of acoustic energy.

> I do commend you for taking the time to organize this conference.
> Hopefully I'll find some time to contribute a paper or article.

Thanks for the discussion. Hopefully others will see that while the topics are not in the mainstream, they are going to be very interesting.

Ross Tessien

E-Mail: tessien@oro.net

[ Index Document - Tessien Archives][ Index Document - Theories of Aether]

LogoforMountainManGraphics,Australia

Impulse Engineering

Questions & Answers on Aether
by Ross Tessien

Web Publication by Mountain Man Graphics, Australia - Southern Autumn '97