<div dir="auto"><div dir="ltr"><div>Hello Carl,</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">I would like to response to some of your queries: </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto"><span style="font-family:arial;font-size:small">>>>>You are declaring that every electron "creates" a vortex. That process would require "energy" which apparently would have to come from the electron (as kinetic energy) and as "Spin of the vortex". </span></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">I believe that you would agree their is still lack of consensus regarding geometrical meaning of energy and mass, or if the consensus is already made, atleast I am not aware it. Let me clarify that by a geometrical description I mean, something which can be expressed in terms of just <b>length and angles.</b> I am thinking purely in terms of lengths and angles, without any mass and energy. These are the same angles that is subtended by a distant stars at our telescopes. These are the same lengths that gets added as volume to Universe as its expands. I do not mean by it any length or angle that our Universe subtend to the so called 4th dimension. </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">It is not necessary that lengths being emitted by electrons shall create new volume at the exact location where it is created. If the net addition of length is only along the axis of Galaxy and not on the Galactic Plane then Gravitation can be explained as an effect of Hubble Expansion. </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">The role of vortex movement and geometry can be related with the propeller or turbine wing construction . Turbines rotates by transferring the fluid on one side to other side. In my proposal, that fluid is made of <strong>discrete lengths</strong> being continuously emitted by electrons on either side of its dominant axis/orientation . </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto"><strong>AVERAGE</strong> length added on either side of electron <strong>PER UNIT TIME </strong>is equal hence electron can move only move in a circular path. The length of the <strong>TIME</strong> of this reference frame of electron corresponds to the period in which <strong>AVERAGING </strong>takes place. And we are well aware that time dilates. </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Vortex movement of electron along the orbit around nucleus shall ensure that fluid/length on nucleus side is propelled to outer side. Hence there is no net increase in the volume of atom. The process continues through series of propellors encountered along the way, until the final propellor direct the fluid (or length) along the axis of the Milky Way Galaxy. In this way, our Milky Way Galaxy continues to gravitate by churning out the fluid (lengths) being created within it, by its constituents (electron, up quark and down quarks)</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto"><span style="font-family:arial;font-size:small">>>>>>It would require that each vortex has a specific "direction", whatever that might mean. </span><br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">By specific direction I does not mean the direction of the vortex itself, but the relative orientation of the platform from which the vortex is created. For example : Tornadoes are produced from the surface of the earth. They may orient at any angle relative to earth surface. But one part of the earth will have a relative orientation with respect to other part of of earth. Howsoever the earth rotates or moves, north pole will always be out of phase by π radians as compared to south pole. In a similar way electrons , up quarks and down will have relative orientation, possibly orthogonal orientation, howsoever they move through the void. </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto"><span style="font-family:arial;font-size:small">>>>>>You have asked : has anyone experimentally found any evidence that any element of "aether" has either mechanical kinetic energy or Spin?</span><br></div><div dir="auto"> <br>I am sure that you yourself have verified as physicist that photons are spin 1 particles. Well I may disagree whether photon is a particle or not, but I certainly agree that photons have spin. Moreover, their is no disagreement on the fact that photons have kinetic energy.You have several times motivated us to do 4D maths, according to which photons follow a path called geodesic. Why can't we say that photons itself constitutes the geodesic.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">I have already clarified that I consider no difference between field and aether. Now if you say the fields exist but aether do not, then I do not have any problem with that. However, the difference between aether and photon should be same as the difference between steady state flow and turbulent flow. Or we can think about photons as local surge in steady state stream of fluid. Steady state flow is that which should cause gravity. Turbulence of steady flow should be electromagnetic waves</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto"><div style="font-family:sans-serif" dir="auto"><font face="Arial" size="2">>>>>>Further, if your idea is right, then every electron is "spacially affected and altered" by that process of creating an aether vortex, but I am not aware tht anyone has ecver detected such aberrant movment of any electron, although that might represennt a possibllel experimental way of confirming what you say.</font></div><div style="font-family:sans-serif" dir="auto"><font face="Arial" size="2"> </font></div><div style="" dir="auto">I believe that I have already explained how the rotation of electrons around nucleus is a representation of steady state flow. And jumping between orbits is possibly the result of turbulent flow. Hence, I do not envisage any other aberrant movement. If you are expecting some specific aberration, as consequence of my explaination. Please let me know. <font face="Arial" size="2"><span style="font-family:Arial;font-size:small"><br></span></font></div><div style="font-family:sans-serif" dir="auto"><font face="Arial" size="2"><span style="font-family:Arial;font-size:small"><br></span></font></div><div style="font-family:sans-serif" dir="auto"><font face="Arial" size="2"><span style="font-family:Arial;font-size:small">>>>>>Finally, if there is an aether which has some finite amount of kinetic energgy in every vortex, and also Spin (identifyingn direction) in every vortex, there should be all sorts of experimental ways to confirm all of what you say.</span></font></div></div><div dir="auto"><div class="gmail_quote" dir="auto"><div dir="ltr"><font face="Arial" size="2"><br></font></div><div dir="ltr">Off-course, there should be all sorts of experimental ways to confirm all that what I say. But I believe that we are yet not there. At the moment our prime objective is to find a <font face="sans-serif">value using existing research, to explain the physical significance of constants that we already know, in terms of just angles and lengths. </font><br></div><div dir="ltr"><br></div><div dir="ltr">Path to finding those values is to find the wave-functions defined by the structure constants (to be discovered) of dominant waveforms that exist around us. These dominant waveforms are:</div><div dir="ltr"><br></div><div>Sun,</div><div>Sea,</div><div>Atmosphere</div><div>Earth,</div><div>Moon,</div><div>Jupiter,</div><div>Saturn etc.</div><div dir="ltr"><br></div><div dir="ltr">Our paper ( <a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4I3nUFrsnnIZU5tRTdDUVJybldYOXBaOFgtd0NSUjlkOU1F/view?usp=drivesdk" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4I3nUFrsnnIZU5tRTdDUVJybldYOXBaOFgtd0NSUjlkOU1F/view?usp=drivesdk</a> ) was just an small attempt into that direction, wherein we have introduced a concept by which, it may become possible to find and refine the structure constant of Solar System</div><div dir="ltr"><br></div><div dir="ltr">Regards,</div></div><div class="gmail_quote" dir="auto"><span><div dir="ltr"><br></div></span></div></div><div class="gmail_extra">Tufail Abbas</div><div class="gmail_extra" dir="auto"><font face="Arial" size="2"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 31 March 2018 at 20:28, <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:cj@mb-soft.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">cj@mb-soft.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid"><u>
<div bgcolor="#ffffff">
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">Interesting thoughts, but I see problem in
your logic. You are declaring that every electron "creates" a
vortex. That process would require "energy" which apparently would have to
come from the electron (as kinetic energy) and as "Spin of the vortex". It
would require that each vortex has a specific "direction", whatever that might
mean. </font></div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2"> </font></div><font face="Arial" size="2">
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">But has anyone experimentally found any evidence
that any element of "aether" has either mechanical kinetic energy or
Spin?</font></div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2"> </font></div><font face="Arial" size="2">
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">Further, if your idea is right, then every electron
is "spacially affected and altered" by that process of creating an aether
vortex, but I am not aware tht anyone has ecver detected such aberrant movment
of any electron, although that might represennt a possibllel experimental
way of confirming what you say.</font></div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2"> </font></div><font face="Arial" size="2">
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">Finally, if there is an aether which has some
finite amount of kinetic energgy in every vortex, and also Spin (identifyingn
direction) in every vortex, there should be all sorts of experimental ways to
confirm all of what you say.</font></div><span class="m_8448946071022922909m_686076695638639446m_-3137151140543002298m_8669802467320259312gmail-HOEnZb"><font color="#888888">
<div> </div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">Carl Johnson</font></div>
<div> </div></font></span></font></font></font></div><font face="Arial" size="2"><font face="Arial" size="2">
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
Physics mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Physics@tuks.nl" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">Physics@tuks.nl</a><br>
<a href="http://mail.tuks.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/physics" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">http://mail.tuks.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/physics</a><br>
<br></font></font></u></blockquote></div><u><font face="Arial" size="2"><font face="Arial" size="2"><br></font></font></u></font></div></div></div>