Charge in the ether

Atom means a vortex of ether. This statement will have many surprising consequences. The vortex movement produces a non-uniform concentration of etherons in the space. Any abundance of etherons produces a negative charge, while scarcity engenders a positive charge.

A model by Paul Laviolette

At first, at least, I have to be remindful of another theory. By now I have to keep it, its elimination being impossible. Further investigations will help to better understand. The idea is from Paul Laviolette, an ether scholar that was able to introduce an alternative model. His aim was to describe some other kind of etherons. He could imagine they were arranged in a particular way in the space. With a positive charge Y, etherons are denser next to the charge, while X etherons become denser far from the charge. Etherons can change from X to Y and vice versa, with kinetic reactions depending on the situation.

Forms of deformation

Etherons can also become, according to Laviolette, G etherons, which are responsible for the gravity field.  He supposes that, in the ether, any force field produces elastic stress or a form of deformation. This can be the result of a different arrangement of the etherons. It will happen according to different densities, due to their position, further or nearer to the charge.

Ideas still in evolution

This is an idea quite similar to the one I want to develop.  What we have proved is that normal etherons produce gravity. It engenders a vertical wind due to the cosmic ether vortex. There are no G etherons. I tend to avoid the concept of the existence of an X and a Y etheron. However, I have to admit, my ideas are still in evolution.

Particles that are bound together

The scientific basilar statement claiming that electrons are the moving charges seems in accordance with our model. We have that abundant etherons will try to fill the space also where there is a scarcity of them. So, if we speak of a negative charge we are not really intending, in our model, a negative particle.  On the contrary, we mean a number of particles bound together. They constitute a point where there is an abundance of them if compared with the average distribution.

Quantum hydrodynamics

The energy that collects and keeps united this abundance of etherons needs to attract them toward the center of the charge. It is a sort of anticyclone that constitutes the high-pressure system and that drives the air toward the center and then downward. Incredibly enough, the electric field is the basic matter of fluid dynamics. It is studied by a discipline called “quantum hydrodynamics”. The positive charge is the cyclone, a vortex that pushes away the air to produce a low-pressure area, i.e. a zone of a scarcity of etherons.

The Coulomb as a measuring unit

A negative and a positive charge will attract each one to the other. The measuring unit for the charge is the Coulomb. One Coulomb is the electric charge moved in one-second trough a conductor by a current of one Ampere. Current is nothing else than a movement of etherons caused by a difference of potential, i.e. by an electric field.

Electric field

One Coulomb is about 6.15×1018 times the charge of one electron. It is an enormous value. To exist, a charge has to be produced by a vortex, an oscillating movement of electrons developed by accumulated energy. Without the vortex, a casual accumulation or scarcity of etherons will immediately disperse in the average distribution of etherons to reconstitute the equilibrium.  The influence that the vortex exerts in the near space is called the electric field. The electric field is a change in the state of things of the space that, being filled with ether, has characteristics of elasticity and inertia. Einstein was defining this elastic deformation like the curvature of the space-time.

Formulas

The attractive or repulsive force that a charge exerts over another charge is given by the well-known formula:

where ε0 is a characteristic of the empty space, i.e. of the ether. It is called dielectric constant or permittivity of the void. This constant quantifies the propensity of the ether to deform under the influence of an electric field. The value of the permittivity for the ether is:

This is the lower value. It is a little higher for the air, 80 times greater for water and, however, higher for any other material.

Magnetic effect

The formula for the force expresses the idea that the force diminishes with the distance between the two charges. You can see in fact the squared radius at the denominator. This thing is easy to understand. Think for example of two magnets. These are not two charges but they are something not too different. The magnetic effect of one magnet over the other diminishes with the distance. It becomes much stronger as the magnets get nearer.

The cyclone-anticyclone analogy

To explain better the concept of the radius being squared let’s think again to the cyclone-anticyclone analogy again. If the cyclone and the anticyclone are very near, the pressure gradient is bigger. This means that there is a big difference of pressure in a little distance. The consequent wind will be as strong as a tornado. If the high and low-pressure points are further, the wind will be much weaker.

An impossible analogy

This above-given formula appears to be well describing the effect of an electric field. Many have been deceived so that they started to imagine and describe the gravity effect in the same way. They say that two bodies endowed with a mass exert an attractive force one upon the other. They feel it appropriate to highlight the analogy between these two formulas:

Only one possibility

We can take into the account the possible analogy:  the two bodies are the two charges. The generated force is proportionally inverse to the squared radius. However, while the first formula is reasonably correct, the second one should be excluded. If this second formula were true, the Earth would be a globe. We have by now a lot of proofs that this is not the reality.

The first formula describes the force exerted by an electrical field. But what about a magnetic field? I will try an answer in my next article. Moreover, we’ll have to understand how, in our model, an atom combines with other atoms.

 

 

Leave a Reply