RELATIVITY

RELATIVITY

<= o:p>

I have alr= eady previously mentioned that the theory of relativity explains what happens in space. In this chapter I shall explain why it happens.

I will ass= ume that the reader has thoroughly read all the previous chapters and also has a sound understanding of the Theory of Relativity.

Despite re= ading this far the reader may have concluded that the Eteronic medium amounts to physics "heresy" and seems aimed at destroying Einstein’s theory. However things are not what they seem.

From here = on I shall refer to the Theory of Relativity as RT and the Eteronic Theory as ET= .

RT is base= d on the principle that space doesn't contain any conductive medium for the tran= sfer of light.

ET is base= d on the assumption that there does exist a conductive medium for light w= hile at the same time demonstrates all phenomenons that up to now we have only associated with RT.

According = to ET, space is filled compactly with eterons - these eterons are the basis for th= e mensuration of length in space. The number of juxtaposed eterons always measures the length.

The speed = of light is measured as d/t, where “d” is the diameter of an Etero= n in the medium the light travels in and “t” is a time tick for an Eteron. Value of “t” for a given eteron varies. t=3Dk.t₀/V where t_=
0 is the average “t” (for eterons of deep space in minimum energy stare), k is a constant and V is volume of the given eteron.

RT states = that an object in movement, seen from a still position, will increases its mass, contracts in size and its time is stretched.

ET present= s a simple model that is able to carry out these phenomenons explaining how and most importantly why they occur.&nb= sp;

RT actually locks the door toward the handling of gravity and inertia, affirming there = is no conductive medium, and that based on this assumption, simply not worthwh= ile attempting to ionise it to produce sub-electric currents (see chapter 12 THE EXPERIMENT).

ET illustrates how to ionise the Eteronic m= edium to achieve many useful phenomenons, among them the handling of inertia and gravity.

Physicists believed there was no conductive medium and therefore concluded it was not worthwhile to attempt any experiments with regard to it. This was a fatal e= rror and delayed the discovery of a means of generating energy without fuel (see chapter 15 THE INTRON TURBINE) and flying without fuel as well as without inertia. As a consequence, generation of energy currently contaminates air = and the temperature of our planet is ever increasing. This mistake has seriously jeopardised Earth’s fragile ecological balance.

In the cha= pter on KINETIC ENERGY (chapter 9) I showed how a particle flattens when advanci= ng through the Eteronic medium. By flattening I meant shorter cones with smaller etero= ns, and therefore, with more energy and greater mass only though in the directi= on of movement.

An object = that moves, distorts or shortens in the direction of the movement. In shuch a direction it has less eterons, heaving each of them smaller diameter. Insid= e an object, the speed of light varies according to the variation of d/t. <= /o:p>

However “d” will be smaller with regard to another ‘still’ object inside the Eteronic medium. For that reason the speed of light will = be lower in denser objects. Eteronic size determines distance and time. <= /span>

When a pho= ton (or a graviton) travels within the Eteronic medium any nuclear particles it finds in its way will be travelled through as if it were just another part = of the Eteronic medium. When the particles are significantly denser than the photon, the photon will only penetrate these particles up to but not greater than its own density.

This is on= ly for the conduction through a particle, and not the interaction with a particle = by a graviton. For such an interaction there will be an energy transfer between = the graviton and the intron.

The part o= f the particle that the photon is able to use as a conductive medium contains ete= rons of smaller diameter than those of the surrounding medium. This causes the s= peed of light to seemingly diminish. The speed doesn't really vary, since it continues to be d/t however it is the “d” that diminishes and “t” that increases – as I mentioned before the size of the respective eterons have collectively shrunk in direct correspondence to the energy the particle has – they are simply smaller in diameter. The ti= me for the transmission of light through the collective distance of the eteron= s in the particle or particles will be longer meaning that the light will travel “slower” in a denser medium.

The effect= of density is known as the refraction of light. A denser medium will correspon= d to “slower” light.

If an obje= ct moves, it becomes dandified and flattens in the direction of movement. Light (photons) crossing in that direction will do so at a slower speed.

The increa= se of mass, besides flattening, causes internal clocks to run slower, effectively stretching time.

These phenomenons are adjusted according to the rules of both the ET and the RT. I have explained the ‘stretching’ of time in the ET. (see the cha= pter on TIME) On the other hand don't forget that the RT hasn’t supplied <= i>any explanation for the “ why” with regard to the phenomenons it describes. Considering this then, the ET is already two steps ahead:

1. It provides a theory with reg= ard to why and,

2. It proposes a medium of conduction and experiments to ascertain and demonstrate not only its existence, but also the possibility of several practical uses.

Let us now= start to draw some parallels between the RT and the ET.

In the Michelson-Morley experiment, no phase variation was obtained when rotating = the interferometer. It’s possible to demonstrate that, if we take Einstein’s formula:

= L =3D Lo.(1 - v²/c²)^0.5

where Lo is the still length, L is the length at speed v, and c is the speed of the light.

The contraction of the interferometer in the direction of the moveme= nt compensates for the variation that causes the speed in the Eteronic medium.=

Owing to t= he effect described in the chapter on KINETIC ENERGY, atoms of the device are flattened in the direction of the movement. Light will therefore travel a shorter tract due to the overall speed of the device, however, shortening of the device is compensated exactly by this flattening variation.<= /span>

<= o:p>

DIAGRAM 11.1

Observe Di= agram 11.1. “f” is a source of collimated light; parallel to the dire= ction of movement of the system and having speed v. E0 is a semitransparent mirror that reflects half the light toward E2 allowing the other half to pass towa= rd E1. E1 and E2 reflect light totally. Mirror E2, due to the movement, reflec= ts the light in a time of:

t₂ =3D 2d/ (c² - v²)^0.5 =

Mirror E1 reflects the light in a time,

t₁ =3D s/(c + v) = + s/(c - v)

That simpl= ified, provides,

t₁ =3D 2.s.c/(c&s= up2; - v²).

A device is constructed such that’s both mechanically sound and very accurate such that “s” exactly equals “d”; the result - we have what’s known as an interferometer!

For the gi= ven formulas, if “s” does equal “d” then “t₁₌” cannot be equal to “t₂”.

If, for ex= ample, v =3D 30 km/sec. (This is the orbital velocity of Earth) and c is the speed= of the light, when the interferometer is rotating around the Earth it should v= ary in phase.

However du= e to “v”, “s” diminishes according to the following form= ula:

s =3D d. (1 - v²/c^{2)^0.5}

With some mathematical manipulation we have time for:

      t_{1 =3D
2.s.c/(c² – v²)        =
            &nb=
sp;}

being parallel to “v” a= nd time for,

      t_{2 =3D
[2.d. (c² – v²)^0.5 ] / (c² – v²⁼)        =

(1)}

being perpendicular to “v”. &nb= sp;

However s = =3D 2.d.[1 – (v/c)²]^0.5 so with some manipulation we also = have:

      t_{1 =3D
[2.d. (c² – =
v²)^0.5
] / (c² – v²)        =

(2)}

So compari= ng (1) and (2) and some formula manipulation the result is t₁ equals t<= sub>2.

In the dia= gram a wave front would take the same time to travel 2d and 2s with no regard for = the speed of the actual device v - the interferometer. This is because the interferometer shortens or compresses in the direction of the movement.

Noti= ce that contraction of particles (and objects made up of particles) is explain= able by the eteronic structure. For speeds very lower than light contraction is proportional to the square of speed. Even the formula [1 - (v/c)^{2]^-0.5
by applying Taylor=
’s
series for such low speeds is}@ 1 + 1/2(v/c)² where v is speed and c is the spee= d of light. So mass-increasing is a direct function of v² . Increasin= g v eteron’s diameter diminishes by linear ratio and mass would increase = by cubic ratio. But necklaces in the direction of movement shorten and amount = of eterons diminishes also by linear ratio. So mass increasing is by square ra= tio. Besides, shortening is due to eteron-diameter & amount diminishing. Then contraction also goes on by square ratio regarding speed (v). Another fitti= ng of relativistic phenomenons into eteron theory.

It’s= also necessary to mention that if the interferometer is made up of material R= 11; very compact – that slows the speed of light, it will share the retar= ding effects among:

1) The effect of the light travelling through a non-compressed medium, and,

2) T= he effect of a flattening of the object driving light slower within the partic= le.

The second effect diminishes the speed of the light with a speed produced by the same formula as the one that models the flattening effect. Both effects are therefore parallel.

      The Eteron= ic medium causes a reduction and, as consequence, a lack of apparent variation= in the speed of the light. Said otherwise, the Eteronic medium works in such a= way that it generates relativistic phenomenons. The Eteronic medium has the characteristic or side effect of causing the speed of light to appear const= ant - that is, d/t.

      If an obje= ct (either mono-atomic or multi-atomic) moves, it shortens in the direction of= the movement.

      Again refe= rring back to the chapter on TIME, “t” also diminishes if eterons bec= ome smaller as it’s time tick is inversely proportional to the EteronR= 17;s volume. Time is stretching in proportion to mass-increasing.

      The privil= eged observer's concept, has up to now, continued to enjoy good health. Consider= the example in the following diagram – Diagram 11.2 - three spacecrafts.<= o:p>

<= o:p>

DIAGRAM 11.2

      The first = (N1) is sitting still while the other two are travelling in formation. In the diagram, N1 is an immobile craft; N2 and N3 travel parallel and at the same speed. The three actually have the same length.

      If from th= e ship N2 a beam of light “h” is emitted, the photons enter a medium t= hat, from the photon’s point of view, is moving. Added to this direction in which the light is launched is the speed-vector “v” of the craft causing it to go out along a new angle (trajectory “f”). The distance between the mid lines of both crafts is “d”.

      It’s obvious that “f” is longer than “d” and the light n= eeds more time to cover the distance “f”.

      On the oth= er hand, the component v of speed increased the energy of the light because the modulus of “f” is greater than “h” (Doppler effect). When this light is received on the ship N3, the Doppler effect removes exce= ss energy because light entering the medium has a component of speed in the sa= me direction as the initial emission of light. Only a still observer sees it having more energy. When the light arrives at N3, it will have the same ene= rgy as it had at N2. That is, the colour doesn't vary. It took more time, but t= he clocks of both ships go slower and will measure the same time it takes for = the light to travel the distance “d”.

      Now an imp= ortant point! The distance “d” doesn't vary since it is normal to the direction of the ships. If from N2 they measure the length of N1, they would say that N1 is longer. If from N1 they measure the length of N2, they would= say that it is shorter. (Assuming N2 flies so near to N1 as to scare the crew!)= .

      These two observ= ations are correct.

      If we meas= ure the speed of light inside N2 or N3, say being emitted from the stern towards the front of the ship and then reflected back at the prow and then received= at the beam the same speed will always be measured, for the same reasons as th= ose exposed in the experiment of Michelson-Morley. (This can also be conducted = from prow to stern and back to the beam – the direction the light travels in the ship mak= es no difference as long as it is parallel with the direction of the movement)= .

     If light is emit= ted from the stern and then received at the prow, without reflecting, the only possibility would be to measure it using two synchronized clocks.

      The clocks= would be synchronized at the same place – say at the stern, because if one = was in stern and the other in the prow, the synchronization signal would take t= ime to arrive at the other clock and perfect synchronization would not be possi= ble. If the synchronization signal were to leave from the middle of the ship, th= ey would arrive at either end at different times. For that reason, we synchron= ize the clocks in the stern. One of the clocks stays in the stern; the other on= e is then taken to the prow.

      Moving the= clock from the stern to the prow will by nature increase the clock’s speed.= Now because the clock travelled at a higher speed than the ship it measured time slower and “became” late. In this way, when light is emitted at= the stern, it takes more time to arrive at the prow than for a ship sitting at rest.

      This reduc= tion of time from the initial synchronization instance will make believe the spe= ed of light has not varied.

      In the oth= er case of synchronizing clocks at the prow and sending the other clock to the stern, the clock travelling to the stern will travel slower than the ship a= nd it will subsequently run faster. The light leaving the prow arrives at the stern at a shorter time than inside a still craft. The stern clock is early= and measures the speed as if at rest.

      If we meas= ure the speed of light traversing the ship, we would experience a condition identical to sending a beam of light from N2 to N3, simply because, we cons= ider N2 and N3 as the same ship - they both are travelling along parallel trajectories at the same speed.

      The still observer will see that light takes more time in arriving from port to starb= oard than at rest, but within the ship the clocks run slower and, again, will measure the same time than at rest.

       This= means that, inside the ship, there is no way to measure a different speed of ligh= t, either still or moving.

      In the cas= e of synchronization of clocks and their later transfer, we can illustrate the c= ase of different reference points in space and time. In fact it will be identic= al to that in the RT. The transformation formulas, obviously, are the same ones found in the RT.

     Next consider the concept of space torsion. According to the RT, if a photon passes beside a = star its path will become bent. Einstein thought photons were attracted by the gravity of a star. So, calculating this angle due to gravity we obtain a va= lue. However the real value is double this since space as described in the ET is denser around a star. The second half of this doubled value is due to refraction caused by the changing density of the space travelled through. <= o:p>

      With Einstein’s contention on space torsion come two errors of concept. Firstly, using the ET as a basis, photons are NOT attracted by gravity. A photon is neither an intron nor a particle. It advances via lateral transfe= r of polar sheaves. When a photon crosses a graviton it first enters into a medi= um of increasing density and after reaching a maximum density travels out of t= he zone through a space of decreasing density. The photon is refracted toward = the area of greater density and thus a privileged observer would see the photon bend towards the centre of the graviton. In this case we are assuming a graviton that is much larger in area and possesses gravitons with relatively low levels of increased density. Now the first bending angle in this case is annulled by the second. A pho= ton does not distinguish between the FHW or RHW of a standard graviton. If howe= ver an intron is forming within the FHW, the photon is bent towards the denser = zone since there are Eterons that are pressured continuously and barriers are overcame.

<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'>       Howe= ver inside the RHW, at any compressing-moment in the FWH, there is a pressure reduction occurring. In this case the RHW is a zone of low pressure and for= ming introns are not attracted towards the denser zone. The phenomenon described above is due to the similarity between the graviton and intron. Both have opposed flows parallel to the moving-formatting direction. But photons have opposed flows perpendicular to the moving direction. So if a photon finds a RHW, the lateral transfer senses a released pressure zone but with barrier-forces. Nevertheless transfer of strong dipoles occurs first and the barrier is overcome; it is as if pressure drop did not exist. The photon ad= vances eliminating the barriers first and compressing eterons later, while an intr= on advances “discovering” barriers first and seeking to bend towar= ds the zone where barriers currently do not exist. This can be summarised simp= ly by saying that photons ignore gravitons as they possess compressed Eterons effectively on both sides. Photons will only bend their line of directio= n by encountering compressed eterons and then moving inside that compressed medi= um. If a photon crosses a graviton, it continues moving on a parallel line clos= e to the original line.

      The second= error of concept (Einstein forgot to add this!) is with regard to time. If a star compresses space around itself, then as a result time becomes stretched too= . A passing photon would thus bend in a bigger angle due to the stretching of t= ime and the diminishment in its speed (smaller Eterons). It appears the attraction of gravi= ty would result in a double effect. If this were the case the angle would be observed as being multiplied by a factor of three rather than a factor of two. Thus from this initial analysis it appears that the multiplication is caused by a factor of two in response to gravity and one due to the refraction.

      However th= is is not the case. In fact it is a doubling effect that actually ignores gravity. The space density refraction angle is actually equal to the calculation for gravity, if it were to exist. However it does not exist. Instead of gravity being the reason, it is the stretching of time for individual eterons that stretches the actual time and creates the second ha= lf of the angle. (See chapter on WAVES, page 46)

      Now accord= ing to the RT, a climbing photon is attracted by gravity and as a result it length= ens by a factor of two.

      Again, the curre= nt explanation would be due to the combined action of gravity and decreasing space-torsion. Here a funny concept appears. With reference to the RT, at what speed does gravity move at? Is it that of light? Then an immediate question would be “how can it reach and ‘catch’ a photon to brake it”? Alternatively is gravity’s speed infinite, or much higher than light? Maybe falling photons are compatible with these ideas, but are climbing ones…

      In contras= t the ET explains it and trivially. Climbing photons lengthen due to the decreasi= ng density of space. Added to this is the contraction of time in relation to t= he increase size of the individual Eterons (possessing less energy). Owing to these two reasons the double value exists.

In conclus= ion the RT is correct but really hasn’t gone far enough. The ET works with the RT in perfectly harmony but goes one step further by supplying a plausi= ble reason for the phenomena observed and measured - it in fact provides the why for this phenomena.

In conclus= ion we could say that the ET is with regard to the RT as the RT is with regard to classic physics. As a result each of them has its area of utility. Classic physics is quite enough for primitive mechanical phenomena. RT is useful in some applications for the calculation of electron-beams inside vacuum tubes= and most nuclear engineering problems. The ET however is useful (and unavoidabl= e at the moment) for electric control of gravity and hyperspace devices for the coming years of the twenty first century.

A last tho= ught. ET is definitively the “Eteronic Theory” and not “Extra-Terrestrial”… or not?

<= o:p>

<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'>