2.1 BASICS OF AETHERIC QUANTUM MECHANICS


Dr. Kozyrev’s experiments give us a radically different view of matter, and its interaction and connection with the surrounding environment, than that which is taught in the scientific mainstream. Therefore, a new model of quantum mechanics is required to account for matter being able to subtly increase and decrease in its weight, based on its interaction with a non-electromagnetic, fluidlike energy source. The more esoteric questions related to how torsion fields connect with consciousness and spirituality shall be relegated to later chapters; at this point, our main concern is to establish a working system of physics that explains exactly what matter is. If nothing else, Kozyrev’s findings show us that we still do not have an adequate model to answer that question.

Thankfully, many adept thinkers are tackling the problems with quantum physics and have come up with aether-based models that answer these nagging questions, which have been almost completely ignored in the Western mainstream scientific community. These pioneers would include Dr. Milo Wolff, Dr. Vladimir Ginzburg, Dr. Volodymyr Krasnoholovets, Charles Cagle, “Smart 1234,” Dr. John Nordberg, Lt. Col. Tom Bearden, Dr. Henry Myers, Dr. Harold Aspden, Dr. R.B. Duncan, Buckminster Fuller, Dr. Oliver Crane and many more. Each of these sources contain different pieces of “the puzzle”, however we feel that the work of Rod Johnson is needed for all remaining paradoxes to be completely accounted for – and it shall be introduced in Chapter Four.

 

Although it is certainly possible for future authors to present a complete, unified model, we will just cover enough interesting highlights here to show that such a model can and does indeed exist.
 

 


2.2 GINZBURG’S NEW VIEW OF RELATIVITY


Our first key concepts to explore come from Dr. Vladimir Ginzburg, who was born in Moscow, USSR and moved to the U.S. with his family in 1974. Having received his Ph.D. in technical sciences in 1968, he was certainly well positioned to have heard about the findings of Kozyrev, one of Russia’s top astrophysicists. However, as we said, there was a strong desire for secrecy in the Soviet regime on these matters, and Ginzburg never mentions Kozyrev’s name in his work. Nevertheless, Ginzburg discovered that a few simple changes could be made to the common equations for relativity theory that would not disagree with any known observations and that furthermore perfectly explain the weight-changing anomalies of matter that Kozyrev had noted.

Relativity theory states that an object gradually increases in its mass once we begin accelerating it. In conventional scientific thought, no object can exceed the speed of light, because as it approaches this speed, the equations state that the object would become infinitely massive. Yet, in very loose terms, Ginzburg found that you could completely reverse (invert) these equations without violating any known scientific observations. This means that instead of growing more massive, an object will actually shed energy back into the aether as it is moved, thus causing it to gradually lose all of its core characteristics of gravitational mass, inertial mass and electric charge as it approaches the speed of light.

 

Ginzburg introduces these new concepts in the next quote: [We have added emphasis and deleted the letters for terms such as “velocity” in order to enhance readability:]

The main two features of these new equations are:

- Both the gravitational mass and inertial mass of a particle decrease as its velocity [speed] increases.
- [The] electric charge of a particle [also] decreases as its velocity increases…

As seen here, an object’s overall mass (weight) is represented by both gravitational and inertial masses, which are simply measurements of how gravity and inertia behave on the object. Curiously, both gravity and inertia have essentially identical effects on matter, which is known as Einstein’s “Principle of Equivalence”. This principle shows us that gravity and inertia are two forms of the same energy at equal strength – one moving downward (gravity) and one providing resistance as we move through space (inertia.) This is one of the easiest ways to see that there must indeed be an “aether” or “physical vacuum” that is behind both forces, and Kozyrev had also noted this connection in his own studies. So, once we start accelerating an object, (which we said is like a sponge submerged in water in this new model,) the added pressure will compress the atoms and molecules in the object and cause more and more of its aether to be released.

Ginzburg then continues:

You may not be prepared to abandon immediately the century-old relativistic equations. But once you are ready to do so, you will discover many amazing things:

- Only when a particle is as rest may it be considered as “pure” matter. As soon as the particle begins to move, its gravitational mass and electrical charge will start to decrease in accordance with the new relativistic equations, so that a part of its matter will be converted into a field. When the particle’s velocity becomes equal to the ultimate spiral field velocity “C”, its gravitational mass and electric charge become equal to zero. At this point, matter will be completely converted into a “pure” field.

The “ultimate spiral field velocity” of “C” that Ginzburg mentions is slightly higher than the normal speed of light, due to the spiraling path that he believes all energy must follow. This simple change to the basic relativity equations then leads to a new quantum physics of transmutation, with the concept that an object could completely disappear from our known physical reality.

 

This raises a key question: “Disappear to where?”
 

 


2.3 MISHIN AND ASPDEN BOTH FIND DIFFERENT LEVELS OF AETHER DENSITY


Ginzburg asserts that an object becomes “pure field” as it increases up to light speed. However, there is solid evidence that there are different vibratory levels of aether, and we therefore conclude that as an object is accelerated towards the speed of light, either by linear motion, internal vibration or related energetic action, the missing energy and mass is simply displaced into a higher vibratory level of aether. In this book we shall refer to these levels as densities. As one example, if you put pressure on a beach ball by slowly pushing it into water, you can gradually move it from being surrounded by air to being surrounded by water, which is denser. When you release the pressure that you placed on the beach ball, the higher density of the water will cause it to pop back into the lower-density atmosphere once more. You will see that nothing in the basic form of the beach ball has changed. Though this is a rather crude analogy, it is by far the best one to explain many anomalies that we will discuss throughout this book.

Certain scientists such as Dr. A.M. Mishin, Dr. Harold Aspden, Dr. Nikola Tesla and John Keely have all independently discovered that the aether is sub-divided into different levels of density. From these findings, we know that the qualities of matter and energy will be different in each density, leading to changes in the basic “laws” of physics within each level. We shall touch briefly upon their discoveries to put our discussion in the proper context.

First of all, Dr. A.M. Mishin of St. Petersburg, Russia conducted extensive measurements over long periods of time in his laboratory, which showed that the aether simultaneously exists in different states, and the state that you will detect is dependent on what type of turbulent disturbance that you create. These findings were established through measurements taken by auto-oscillating electromechanical systems similar to some of Kozyrev’s designs, with an undisclosed “added component” that was more suited to detecting torsion waves from biological systems as opposed to inorganic systems. With these measurement devices and techniques, Mishin could detect:

- the “temperature” of the aether, akin to the amount of vibratory disturbance in it
- the direction and polarization of the aether
- the flowing movements or “fluxes” of the aether

Mishin numbered the different densities of aether that he discovered as follows:

- Ether-1 behaved like a solid-state body
- Ether-2 behaved like a dense superfluid liquid
- Ether-3 behaved like a gaseous body, connected with molecular motion
- Ether-4 is the state we observe as stellar plasma energy
- Ether-5 corresponds to galactic processes

As we can see, it appears that each level of aether that Mishin discovered has a different level of density than the others, most specifically visible in the first three, which are obviously in decreasing order of density. We should remember that Dr. Mishin is not the only scientist to have discovered that the aether exists at different density levels. Since the 1950s, Dr. Harold Aspden has documented similar discoveries, and in his case they are backed up by extensive equations. Furthermore, all the major foundations of Aspden’s work had successfully passed peer-review processes and ended up being published in prestigious scientific journals, and this material shall be covered in later chapters. Also, the 19th century physicist John Keely classified seven different densities of aether, probably through a discovery process similar to Dr. Mishin’s.

All of this research allows us to introduce the concept that these different levels of aetheric energy density actually correspond to different “dimensions” or planes of existence. Many ancient mystery-school teachings seem to agree that there is an Octave of seven major densities that correspond with the colors in the rainbow or the notes in the Diatonic musical scale, and this has been well covered in our previous volumes. Such a wonderful, elegant solution to the quirky mathematical problems of “higher dimensions” is exactly what we would expect to see in a Divine Cosmos. The purest, most harmonic vibrations of visible light and audible sound are both conveniently organized into an Octave framework, and it appears that the vibrations of the aether are no different.

As we continue to present information throughout the rest of this book, the combined effect of Mishin and Aspden’s models of a multi-leveled “aether” will be very important to our arguments. Mishin gives us the direct observational evidence that such levels exist, and Aspden gives us a complete mathematical foundation to explain how and why they exist. Never before has there been a theory of quantum physics that can account for mysterious, documented effects related to objects appearing, disappearing and / or reappearing around us.

 

These effects include the anomalies of the Bermuda Triangle and other such vortexes as well as the many surprising, scientifically documented accounts of telekinesis, such as those now emerging from China in Paul Dong’s book China’s Super Psychics, discussed later in this book. The material in this book sets forth such a theory that satisfies these requirements. Even more importantly, we will establish that these differing aetheric densities must also correspond to different levels of intelligence and consciousness.

 

And for now, we must continue to focus on the basics.
 

 


 2.4 GINZBURG AND THE “DYNOSPHERE”


 Dr. Ginzburg also suggests that his new relativity equations reveal the existence of spiraling waves of energy, and a “spiral field” that travels through a sphere-based, fluidlike aether that he calls the “dynosphere:”

[The] dynosphere is an assembly of the field bubbles that fill the entire space in the universe.

Obviously, Ginzburg’s theory is in exact harmony with Kozyrev’s findings. Ultimately, the “aether” must be visualized at the tiniest level as being composed of spherical bubbles of aetheric energy that exist throughout the entire Universe. Torsion waves move through this aether by causing adjacent “field bubbles” to bump into each other. No one bubble actually moves very far in its position, just as a set of floating objects can essentially remain in the same position as waves roll by in the water. Each time an impulse of momentum hits a field bubble, the bubble then collides into its neighbors, transferring the momentum. The impulse will continue to be transferred along even though all the bubbles end up in the same relative positions that they started in.

Ginzburg’s new model also leads to the idea that atoms and molecules are simply vortex formations, akin to smoke rings or whirlpools, which have formed within this fluid-like aether that he calls the dynosphere. Though he and many other thinkers have provided great amounts of evidence to back up their claims, most mainstream scientists continue to shun these concepts. They stand on the well-worn edifices of thought that insist that atoms are made of particles.

 

However, we will now demonstrate that the particle model is nothing more than a belief that has been built up from a series of assumptions.
 

 


2.5 ASSUMPTIONS OF QUANTUM PHYSICS


Niels Bohr was the first to promote the “magnetron” model of the atom, which involves particles that orbit each other like a tiny Solar System. Many people are not aware that this model cannot be true and is actually quite misleading, as a number of experiments confirm that the so-called “particles” behave as if they were waves. This leads to confusing problems such as the Schroedinger’s Cat paradox and Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle, both of which try to tell us that atoms are not actually “real” but are only “probabilities” at the quantum level. To have something that is not “real” as the foundation of matter seems quite absurd.

 

Here, we must remember that the majority of our conclusions about the quantum realm are assumptions only, which have been built up from only two indirect sources:

  • Spectroscope Analysis

  • Vapor-Trail Analysis

Beginning with the first on the list, spectroscope analysis is simpler than most would imagine. A particular element (group of atoms) is stored in a small, transparent container while it is in a changing state of energy, which causes it to release light (photons). Then, a special form of light is shone through the element, which pushes the released photons along so that they pass through a prism (lens) or grating (slot) that breaks them up into a rainbow color spectrum.

 

The spectrum is then recorded on film and analyzed, and due to the unique quality of the light radiation that is shined through the changing element, (which is appropriately named as “black body” radiation,) the film will only capture a small series of vertical colored lines. These lines are created by untold numbers of photons, at certain exact color frequencies, which the chemical element is releasing. So all we know for certain is that the atoms are releasing certain color frequencies of light (photons), which are then being analyzed – anything else is an informed assumption.

The second category of quantum measurement is “vapor-trail” or “bubble chamber” analysis. The medium that is used to detect the “particles” is typically a glass chamber that is filled with highly pressurized gas, such as water vapor. The pressure is so high that no further molecules can be forced in, and when a charged “particle” travels through the medium, it creates visible disturbances. Here is Dr. Milo Wolff’s explanation of this:

The second means of measurement involves directing single charged particles to enter a medium which will record the particle’s path by abstracting part of its energy to create some sort of visible reaction in the medium. Photographic film and vapor-saturated air or liquids are common media. In the latter two cases the passage of the particle [through the medium] causes tiny fog particles or bubbles to appear; hence the method is called a cloud chamber or a bubble chamber. If a magnetic field is present, the particle path is curved [in a spiral] and measurement of the path permits calculation of mass, momentum and energy.

As Dr. Wolff indicates, the vast majority of our “particle” beliefs come from these two forms of measurement and the assumptions that have been inferred from them. One additional case of “proof” concerns the idea that atoms have a nucleus of particles. This came about from Rutherford’s experiment where he bombarded a piece of very thin gold foil with high-energy protons, and measured how many of the protons passed through the foil. A very small but measurable number of the protons did not pass through the foil. Since not all of the protons went through, Rutherford concluded that these protons had bounced off of a tiny “nucleus” in the center of the atom and that the rest of the area was largely “empty space.”

So, we have Rutherford’s experiment, spectroscopy and bubble chamber analysis as the foundation upon which the vast majority of assumptions about quantum physics have been made. No atoms had even remotely been “seen” visually until 1985, when IBM Research Almaden Labs was the first to use an electron tunneling microscope to actually photograph the organization of molecules of germanium in an ink-blot. What we see from this experiment in Figure 2.1 are indistinct, fuzzy spherical objects that appear to have some non-spherical geometric qualities to their shape and are in an extremely geometric pattern of organization, which was definitely a surprise for conventional science.

 

The image was artificially colored orange and green to allow the eye to discriminate between the two types of atom that were seen:

Figure 2.1 – Actual photograph of atoms of germanium in an ink-blot.
 

Furthermore, when quantum physicists have studied the “electrons” of the atom, they have observed that they are not actually “points” at all, but rather form smooth, teardrop-shaped “clouds” where the narrowest ends of the “drops” converge upon a very tiny point in the center (Figure 2.2). Here, we shall reprint excerpts from Dr. Milo Wolff’s book just to make the point absolutely clear, with emphasis added:

p. 122 – There are no Electron Orbits! Whoever started the notion of electrons traveling around the nucleus like planets made a terrible blunder! If you have learned such an idea, discard it immediately. Instead, all calculations and all experiments show that no satellite-like orbital motion exists in the normal atom. Instead, there are standing wave patterns. For example, see the case of N=1 in Figure 9-1 [or in these diagrams, M=0 and L=0] where the standing wave pattern is entirely spherical. The center of the electron pattern is also the center of the proton pattern. This is the normal situation of the H atoms in the universe; they have spherical symmetry, not orbits.


Figure 2.2 – Electron clouds from top-down view (L) and from side view (R). [Courtesy Wolff, 1990]

p. 133 –

1) All experiments to probe a central structure of the electron have been negative.

2) No QM theory exists that predicts a size for the electron, a mass, nor a charge. Further, there is no theory that quantifies the particle in a meaningful calculation. This implies that QM actually has no need of a particle concept because all the calculations are the same whether or not you believe in particles.

3) The substantiality of “mass” is doubtful because it can always be converted to electromagnetic energy, which has no particle properties.

As Dr. Wolff suggests, the observed teardrop shapes of electron clouds are exactly what we would expect when seeing a “standing wave” of vibration. We remember that the hydrogen atom’s electron cloud was seen to have a spherical shape.

 

This is also a direct indication that atoms are vortex formations, since the hydrogen atom is considered the “building block” of all the other elements, with one hypothetical “proton” in the nucleus and one hypothetical “electron” that is actually represented by the spherical cloud.
 

 


2.6 NEGATIVE AND POSITIVE: SIMPLE DIFFERENCES IN PRESSURE


As every scientist knows, the electron clouds have a negative charge and the “protons” in the much-tinier nucleus area have a positive charge. This is known as “charge polarity,” since there are two charges that are polarized, or opposite. It has long been a mystery as to what this truly means, and why there is a “flow” of charge. This problem has boggled the mind of many a scientist, and Dr. Aspden admits it in the following quote:

I admit that I cannot as yet solve the riddle of charge polarity. It lies in unexplored territory and apart from a few brief excursions into that territory, I see it as uncharted ground… [it is] a challenge and possibly the final frontier of our conquest of physics. It surprises me that the subject is not even mentioned by physicists as something warranting research investigation. It seems that it is easier to explore what happened in the first moments of the ‘Big Bang’ than to look into what is happening within us and all around us here and now on Earth. [emphasis added]

In Dr. O. Crane’s new model and certain others, these opposing charges, or charge polarities of negative and positive are actually nothing more than differences in aetheric pressure. The negative electron clouds have a higher pressure, and the positive nucleus has a lower pressure. Put simply, the negative charges in the electron clouds are flowing into the positively charged area at the center of the atom.

This suggests that a much easier unification between electromagnetism and gravity is possible, as both gravity and charge polarity represent the pressing-in of aetheric energy towards the center of the spherical field or object. (Esoteric science might say that these are both forms of “the striving of all matter and energy to again become One.”)

 

The only real difference, then, between gravity and charge polarity is in the strength of aetheric pressure that is measured, and the degree of symmetry with which the energy flow presses in across the sphere’s surface. Why do we say symmetry is important? Simply put, the gravitational forces on Earth are very consistent from one place to another, whereas in the atom you have areas between the electron clouds where there is no “flow” of energy towards the center. We will explain why there are these partitioned areas later in this chapter.


Now, with Dr. Crane’s “aetheric pressure” concept for charge, the mystery of charge polarity is cleared. This concept is given undeniable factual support by what is known as the Biefield-Brown effect, first proposed by Prof. Paul Biefield, who had once been a fellow student of Albert Einstein in Zurich, Switzerland. Biefield proposed an “aetheric” concept of charge as a flow of aether, where the negative charge was an area of high pressure within a sea of aetheric energy, and this pressure would flow into low-pressure areas of what we call positive charge in this same sea. If this model were indeed true, Biefield proposed, then with a high enough level of electromagnetic intensity, it should be possible for an anti-gravitational propulsive force to be created.

The first person to successfully test Biefield’s theoretical effect was Dr. Townsend T. Brown in 1923. His experiment involved a “plate condenser,” which is simply a positive electric plate (literally a disc shape, interestingly enough) and a negative plate that are sandwiched on top of each other with a non-conductive or dielectric material between them. Then, this plate condenser is charged with a high amount of electricity and suspended by a firm wire that would be able to rotate in a large circle on the horizontal plane if it were moved. When this object is charged up, it will move independently towards the positive plate of the condenser, sustaining a constant thrust and causing the whole wire / plate condenser assembly to spin around in circles by itself.

 

Then, Dr. Crane continues:

When the condenser was vertically fastened to a beam scale, a weight increase showed if the positive pole (low pressure) was pointing down. Correspondingly a weight loss occurred when the negative pole (high pressure) was pointing down. The intensity of the effect was determined by the size of the pole plate areas, the voltage level and the polarization capability of the dielectric. [emphasis added]

The last statement regarding the “polarization capability of the dielectric” may be confusing. As we said, a dielectric is a non-conducting substance, which in this experiment is sandwiched between the two oppositely charged plates. The “polarization capability” refers to how well the dielectric material can keep the charges between the two plates separated, or polarized.

So, what we can see here is a very core and essential finding for understanding the structure and function of the Universe. When a flow is established between the negative and positive pole, a river of energy is created in the surrounding aether, and the river of aetheric energy will forcefully move towards the positive. This effect is indeed strong enough to counteract gravity. Many reputable sources agree that Brown devised a means to create a self-contained unit which could defeat gravity and rise into the air on its own, and that his work was immediately classified thereafter.

 

Since that time, at the Disclosure Project Executive Summary Briefing on May 10, 2001, which Wilcock attended along with a number of congressional aides and other invited guests, certain witnesses testified that various deep-black programs have indeed mastered the use of this technology for propulsion. The system of concentric magnetic rings and rotating magnetic rollers, devised by Prof. John R. R. Searl and discussed in our previous volume, is another workable anti-gravity system, and was successfully duplicated and the results subsequently published in Russia by Roschin and Godin.

Certain “feelers” are starting to be put out to the public’s attention that the Biefield-Brown effect could be used for propulsion. Jeff Cameron of Transdimensional Technologies filmed two versions of his “T3” device in action, a triangular metallic frame with thin wires that were attached to each corner. Over a non-conducting circular base, the triangular frame is seen to levitate and slightly wobble around in the air once the electric current is turned on. A loud and satisfying “SNAP” is heard as the flow is cut off and the device abruptly drops back down to the surface.

 

Not surprisingly, as of Feb. 2002 the entire contents of the website were pulled except for the title page, with a vague promise to “keep checking.” Thankfully, in March 2002, Jim Ventura independently replicated the exact same experiment, which is based on the research of Jean-Louis Naudin, and three films of it now exist on Art Bell’s website for the general public to view. Interestingly, the object spins around constantly on its wires in the first two films, suggesting the spiraling pressure of torsion waves (gravi-spin energy) at work.

In the atom, the high-pressure negative “source” pushes towards the lower-pressure positive “sink,” and this is responsible for the electron clouds flowing in to the nucleus. This leads us to the conclusion that atoms and the “empty space” of aether that surrounds them are both made of the same fluidlike energetic material; the only difference is that in an atom, the aether has begun swirling into a low-pressure central vortex, traveling through the electron clouds. Not surprisingly, one informant from the Disclosure Project revealed that the manmade ARV craft (Alien Reproduction Vehicles) are known to the insiders as “flux-liners.”

 

This is an obvious play on the term “airliner,” and demonstrates their knowledge that the vehicles are riding on the aetheric energy flux or flow instead of air.
 

 


2.7 SPHERICAL SYMMETRY AND A CENTRAL AXIS


For our next key point regarding the nature of the atom, we see that the “particle” experiments of quantum physics have shown that there is a tendency towards a spherical structure of these energy fields. However, these spherical structures also have been seen to spin. Various techniques have been used to make this discovery, such as by measuring the qualities of identical “particles” as they are released from an emitter at successively different angles before colliding with a detector. The validity of the discovery of “spin” is not in dispute in the mainstream quantum world.

 

As Dr. Wolff states it in Chapter 10 of his book, entitled Particles and Electricity,

p. 147 – A dilemma exists with respect to the rotational character of spin, as follows: Particles are spherically symmetrical in regard to charge, mass, and behavior. In spite of this, having a spin from a human realm view demands a spin axis, which would destroy the spherical symmetry! How can this be? Is there symmetry or isn’t there? There might be an escape from this dilemma because whenever spin is transferred in an interaction (i.e. spin is measured,) the spin axis is always found to be along the line of particle motion. [emphasis added]

Thus, as “particles” move through the aether, their central axis of spin is aligned with the direction of their motion. This gives them the exact same “vortex” quality of movement as we would see with a smoke ring – this formation is automatically created by any straight-line movement through a fluid medium.

Our next question is exactly what this spherical vortex will look like. Let us begin by visualizing what happens when we have a single fluid that rotates around a central area. Once the fluid begins rotating, it forms a whirlpool along its rotational axis. This can be demonstrated very simply by filling up a sink with water and then stirring up the water with our hand in a large circle. We will quickly form a whirlpool in the center of the circle.

Now, we need to imagine that same fluid rotating inside of a spherical area, in this case the outside of the atom. What we will discover is that a whirlpool will again form along the rotational axis, between the north and south poles of the sphere. This whirlpool forms a complete hole through the center of the sphere. On one pole of the sphere, the water will flow in, with the vortex becoming progressively narrower as it approaches the center, and then the continuing momentum of the water will cause it to flow out through the opposite pole, the vortex becoming progressively wider as it reaches the outer edge. The water must flow in one side and out the other, since it has nowhere else to go. This is a basic property of “torus” formations and can be seen in the inwardly-curling movement of smoke rings, for example.

Naturally, a picture is worth a thousand words, and Figure 5.3 from Charles Cagle shows the structure of the spherical torus at the quantum level, which he calls the “electromagnetotoroid”:

Figure 2.3 – The “Electromagnetotoroid,” showing the spherical-torus formation at the quantum level.
 

As we continue with our investigation into the phenomenon of spin, we find that others have adopted the spherical torus for the quantum realm as well. Dr. Harold Aspden’s theories in this regard are among the most comprehensive and well-substantiated mathematically, and have been published in some of the finest physics journals.

 

Dr. Aspden also illustrates the concept that atoms are actually spherical torus formations, while not using the word “torus”:

I interject here the comment that my onward research into this subject tracks evidence of the aether being able to exhibit rotational momentum, angular momentum, inasmuch as a sphere of something having a mass density can spin about a central axis and not disturb enveloping aether.

 

Such is the vista that opens provided we keep faith with the aether belief and do not allow our minds to be usurped by Einstein doctrines.


 

2.8 SPECIFIC ANOMALIES MUST BE SATISFIED


Our job would be relatively simple if all we had to do was to consider spherical atoms with a central axis, forming as vortexes in a fluidlike aether. However, there are specific geometric anomalies that turn up in quantum observations which must be satisfied in order for this model to be complete. Here are two basic quantum problems that would need to be addressed for the model that we are presenting to be accurate:

  • First of all, we would need to describe why “electron clouds” form in the atom with empty spaces between them, as opposed to simply spherical formations

  • Secondly, we would need to understand how and why these spherical-torus energy formations gather into crystal structures, such as sodium chloride or salt, which forms a cube. One of the interesting properties of such a crystal is that it will naturally fracture into miniature versions of itself, where the same angular relationship is preserved between its facets

Both questions may be solved when we begin to understand the importance of what are known as the Platonic Solids, a set of five different geometric shapes that have a great deal of importance in ancient sacred science, and have been introduced in each of our previous volumes. In short, the “Platonic Solid” geometric forms will naturally appear in a spherical “vortex” of vibrating (pulsating) fluid. In the next chapter we will gain an understanding of the ancient and modern importance of Platonic Solids, and also see the weight of surprising and unexpected physical evidence to prove that this theory must be correct.

 

Then, in Chapter Four we will bring in the theoretical data of Rod Johnson that completely rounds out our view of the quantum realm.
 

 


 REFERENCES:

1. Aspden, Harold. Energy Science Tutorial #5. 1997. URL: http://www.energyscience.co.uk/tu/tu05.htm

2. Cagle, Charles. Electromagnetotoroid model. 1999. URL: http://www.singtech.com

3. Cameron, Jeff. Transdimensional Technologies. 2001. URL: http://www.tdimension.com/

4. Crane, Oliver et al. Central Oscillator and Space-Time Quanta Medium. Universal Expert Publishers, June 2000, English Edition. ISBN 3-9521259-2-X

5. Mishin, A.M. (Levels of aetheric density) URL: http://alexfrolov.narod.ru/chernetsky.htm

6. Mishin, A.M. The Ether Model as Result of the New Empirical Conception. International Academy of MegaSciences, St. Petersburg, Russia URL: http://alexfrolov.narod.ru/mi-paper.htm

7. Wolff, Milo. Exploring the Physics of the Unknown Universe. Technotran Press, Manhattan Beach, CA, 1990. ISBN 0-9627787-0-2. URL: http://members.tripod.com/mwolff

Return to Contents