Reliable new evidence challenges the nul result of the 1887 Michelson and Morley Ether experiment

I am convinced that the Earth is moving through a fluid like ether which is space itself

Having conducted extensive research I am strongly of the opinion that the Earth is moving through a fluid-like ether which is space itself. I have come to this conclusion for a number of important reasons. I feel that the primary reason is that in the physics community there remains confusion and inter physicists antagonism with respect to the original 1887 Michelson and Morley ether experiment results. This is together with the later Dayton Miller results of 1929 to 1932. In my opinion this is because of the divorce between physics theoreticians and down to earth field experimentalists. Loyd S Swenson seems to affirm these words when he said: “The origins of relativity theory may be explained in various ways, but one neglected factor in that summation is the way different canons of scholarship in physics and history have effected the selection of data and the narration of relationships between experiment and theory…” “…linear and sequential development that cannot be justified.”

The importance of these words are that physics history has lead to the contemporary conclusion that the original 1887 Michelson and Morley experiment was a null result, and this is incorrect. I discuss this matter at greater length in my blog entitled “The day science lost its way“. This blog also looks at the politics amongst physicists and analysts that dominated the debate at that time. Extensive quotes from different parties are included in it as well. My position with the Michelson and Morley experiment is as follows. You should read these words in context with the remainder of this blog.

First of all I will discuss what I consider to be the “true” nature and status of space is and how it might demonstrably work in the manner that it does.

1] Space is a material like “foam” [substance] with fluid like properties. Furthermore space is not static.

2] I believe that space can be seen to be like analogical  jelly that waxes and wanes with respect to itself. It is this waxing and waning that causes variations of space foam densities. It is these variations in space foam densities that causes matter to be formed.

3] It is this variation of densities in space with itself that means space is a dynamic space (like a “brew” of happenings and possibilities to happen in space). This dynamic space is a space of varying ratios and averages of its fluid like (foam) properties. I see this process as being the natural inherent energy of the universe as it “flexes” in the manner that it does.

4] I see that packets of matter in space foam are packets of matter that move away from each other as the universe expands. It is these “gaps” between “blobs” of moving matter in space that causes gravity. Within this process matter also absorbs space foam. This absorption process is also a representation of its dynamic nature.

5] It is these diverse ratios, averages and densities of the dynamic space and matter relationship that are the medium for light waves and it is in this respect that this combined process can be seen as being like an ether. It is for this reason that there can be no absolute frame of space. However, we can talk about space as being a dynamic matrix of information. This is information that means something and creates the conditions for possibilities and probabilities to do something.

6] I see these possibilities and probabilities to do something as being like an “opportunities” field also unto itself from wherein “all things” can happen. I also see this same field as being a field of averages from which the effects of sub-quantum mechanics emerge. It is from these effects that Quantum Particle physics grew. This same field can be also be seen as the field of non-locality [entanglement] that informationally connects all matter and events related thereto together in the universe. This field is without time.

7] With respect to the Michelson and Morely experiment it was Dayton Miller [and other notable physicists at the time] who  were seeking to clarify and explain the alleged null result of the Michelson and Morely experiment. Miller and others were seeking to explain the spread of values from measurements derived from the apparatus that was being used at that time. I believe that the variations in the measurements that Miller and others detected can be explained by the natural and dynamic process of space itself. By this I mean that these variations of measurements at different times [also across the wider universe] are because of the changes in averages of densities of the properties of space.

8] The Earth moving through these space disturbances [including light] in the sub-quantum mechanics field exacerbates these natural space fluctuations. These fluctuations would be significantly less if the universe was static.

9] For these reasons I consider that it should be the averages of the measuring apparatus readings with respect to the original Michelson and Morely experiment that should be considered by physicists. This as distinct from short term measurements that might have been taken at either regular or irregular times.

10] I feel that it is only by physicists regularly checking the readings of  the measuring apparatus over a considerable time [as Miller did] that meaningful averages with respect to these measurements can determine if the 1887 Michelson and Morely measurements were null or not. This also questions whether the dynamic nature of space would then be needed to be considered by physicists with respect to the measurement results as well.

11] Also, because of the “primitive” nature of the original measuring apparatus of the Michelson and Morely interferometer, I feel that it is unreasonable and incorrect for contemporary physicists to maintain that the Michelson and Morely results were null. I say that their results were measuring “something”. These “somethings” were further identified by Dayton Miller and others. These “somethings” also mean “somethings” with respect to the dynamic nature of space too.

12] Thus I am stating that it is seems to me that certain relativity modelling types that contemporary physicists are using to justify their theories today have never been correct in the first place. Furthermore I am stating today (as you will find a little later) that I have described the means as to how and why the variations of measurements occurred in both the Michelson and Morely experiment, as well as those of Miller and others. With respects to physics experiments today I am saying that these types of variations need to be considered and accounted for in their experimental findings.

A contemporary independent science analyst [M.P.] has written the following words with respect to this contentious debate. You will note that they broadly follow my line of reasoning as I just discussed as well. The analyst points out that the words in a statement made by Einstein in 1920 in respect to his General Relativity theory are in contradiction with later experimental findings of other distinguished physicists at that time who continued to maintain that ether existed. This ether “field” they believed was without time. I cite the analyst’s words as follows:

Quote:

“Ether and the Theory of Relativity
Albert Einstein, May 5th, 1920

Ether and the Theory of Relativity

“….according to the general theory of relativity space is endowed with physical qualities; in this sense, therefore, there exists an ether……….But this ether may not be thought of as endowed with the quality characteristic of ponderable media, as consisting of parts which may be tracked through time. The idea of motion may not be applied to it…”

What this means is that in General Relativity Theory, space has physical properties, and therefore can be considered to be an ether. However unlike a liquid or gas which consists of molecules, the space of General Relativity Theory does not consist of parts that can be identified as being in motion.

In addition, General Relativity Theory predicts that measurements of the speed of light are not affected by motion through space. This implies that experiments such as the Michelson Morley experiment that attempt to detect such motion, by comparing the speeds of light in different directions, should detect no effect.

However, on page 206 of the following paper, one reads the following:
The Ether-Drift Experiment and the Determination of the Absolute Motion of the Earth

Dayton C. Miller, Case School of Applied Science
July 1933, Reviews of Modern Physics, Volume 5.

“……Michelson and Morley performed the historic experiment in the northwest room of the basement of the Main Building of Adelbert College in Cleveland in 1887; their entire series of observations was of six hours’ duration…….

……The brief series of observations was sufficient to show clearly that the effect did not have the anticipated magnitude. However, and this fact must be emphasized, the indicated effect was not zero; the sensitivity of the apparatus was such that the conclusion, published in 1887, stated that the observed relative motion of the earth and ether did not exceed one fourth of the earth’s orbital velocity. This is quite different from a null effect now so frequently imputed to this experiment by writers on Relativity….”

This implies that the Michelson Morley experiment DID detect motion relative to space which contradicts the prediction by General Relativity Theory that such experiments couldn’t detect such motion.

Dayton C. Miller was confident of what he said, because he had repeatedly performed Michelson Morley type experiments a sufficient number of times to eventually arrive at a speed and direction for the motion of the earth relative to space (or relative to ether if you prefer that term).”

The same analyst went on to discuss Einstein’s concept of General Relativity ether with respect to the Dayton Miller results.

Quote:

“In General Relativity Theory space is an ether but the idea of motion cannot be applied to it. So according to this theory, even though the earth is orbiting our sun at tremendous speed, and orbiting the center of our galaxy at even greater speed, we are entitled to consider the earth to be at rest relative to space itself.

This is a comforting idea, though the experiments by Dayton C. Miller and Michelson Morley seemed to show that the earth is in fact moving relative to space.

However, a feature of these experiments is that the speeds

Varied wildly, and,
Their values calculated using Newtonian physics theory were too low to be credible.

Eg. Here are the speeds calculated by Miller using Newtonian physics theory during the course of a 24 hour period. The heavy black line is a running average.

Notice that the speeds vary a lot and are only about 5 .. 15 km/s, whereas the orbital speed of the earth is about 30 km/s, so to obtain credible speeds Miller had to multiply his measured speeds by a factor that would make his final values compatible with the orbital speed of the earth. That wasn’t difficult, but he didn’t have a theory to explain why this factor was needed.

The lack of theoretical justification for this factor he introduced would have made his results suspect.
And as the large variations of determined speed are not consistent with the concept of the earth traveling through a motionless ether (which was the traditional idea of an ether), that raised questions about his results as well.

Perhaps for those reasons, most physicists chose to ignore his results in favor of relativity theory which simply predicted that detecting motion relative to space couldn’t be done.”

In summary, these words mean:

1] The dynamic three space theory of Cahill (and other dynamic space theories similar to it such as the Awareness Model and a SMUT particle experiment related thereto) is fully consistent with the results of the Michelson and Morley and Dayton Miller experiments.

2] Traditional Ether Theory is not fully consistent because it doesn’t predict the variations of speed which are seen. I have shown why this cannot be done.

3] Einstein Ether is not consistent because general relativity predicts that zero speed should be seen as he predicted in his modelling.

With respect to Einstein it should be remembered that he progressively changed his mind over time with respect to there being a motionless (sea like) ether. For example in a lecture that he delivered in 1924 Einstein said “…but every theory of local action assumes continuous fields and also the existence of an ether.” You will find two important statements made by Einstein with respect to his views about ether in my blog entitled “The great ether debate”. The quotation cited can be found therein.

I acknowledge that Einstein’s words were mostly related to his theory of General Relativity and that they had no specific relationship with his theory of Special relativity. However, I point out that Einstein in his statement in 1920 said that ether was necessary for his theory of General Relativity to make sense. My point is that how is it that when Einstein was working to develop a progressive unity theory of everything could he employ an ether continuum in one model and not the other. This is more especially so if you consider my blog entitled: “The inescapable duality of all things” as well as my blog “The words implicit and explicit seem to describe all that “IS”“. Einstein died before he could complete his unity theory.

It is only after Einstein began to change his mind about ether that around this time that the wider scientific community began to ignore Einstein’s views relating to ether. They saw ether as having no role in the continuing development of contemporary physics models. I believe that I have shown otherwise. I also strongly believe that you should note Einstein’s concern about the null result or otherwise with the 1887 Michelson and Morley experiment (together with the later and more sophisticated experiments of Dayton Miller cited below). Einstein also questioned that both his Special and General Relativity theories would be invalid in their then current form. They would have become significantly different theories.

Einstein said with respect to this matter:

Quote:

“Should the positive result (meaning the Michelson – Morley experiment) be confirmed (it eventually wasn’t), then the special theory of relativity, and with it the general theory of relativity, in its current form, would be invalid. Experimentum summus judex. Only the equivalence of inertia and gravitation would remain. However, they would have to be a significantly different theory”

Source: Albert Einstein in a letter to Edwin E. Slosson, July 1925

I urge you to peruse Cahill’s opinion about ether theory as well as those of M Consoli and A. Pluchino commencing on page 445.

Additionally I suggest that you consider a detailed essay written by Loyd S. Swenson written on the same topic in 1970. The title of Swenson’s paper is “The Michelson-Morley-Miller experiments before and after 1905”.

I have drawn attention to the well documented divorce between physics theorists and experimentalists with respect to the long standing ether debate. What must be kept in mind with respect to this debate is that regardless of a disagreement between theorists and experimentalists is that there was no doubt in Isaac Newton’s mind that ether exists. He also expressed the opinion that there are small particles in the ether. (This seems to align with the debate about particles that exist in respect to the dynamic Awareness Model as well as comments I have made today) that links local space foam to a non-local (sub-Quantum Mechanics type of continuum as described by Bob Henderson) awareness continuum. Here is what Newton had to say about his concept of ether:

Quote:

“I do not know what this Aether is”, but that if it consists of particles then they must be exceedingly smaller than those of Air, or even than those of Light: The exceeding smallness of its Particles may contribute to the greatness of the force by which those Particles may recede from one another, and thereby make that Medium exceedingly more rare and elastic than Air, and by consequence exceedingly less able to resist the motions of Projectiles, and exceedingly more able to press upon gross Bodies, by endeavoring to expand itself.”

Source

Apart from the Michelson and Morley, Dayton Miller, Cahill, Ives and numerous other experiments relating to the existence and properties of an universal ether conducted over a period of nearly a century, contemporary physicists have never become convinced that a universal ether exists. Today, in addition to my earlier notes, I provide what I consider to be sound reasons as to why this universal reluctance by contemporary physicists to positively accept ether into their modelling should change. I present you with two references relating to ideas and experiments conducted by Morris to consolidate my position in this blog. These are a physics paper entitled “Perth-Muenster REG-REG Correlations: Remarkable New Evidence for Dynamical Space” and a separate open access repository (zip file)  archive supporting Morris’s paper with data.

The abstract for Morris’s paper is as follows:

Quote:

“We have obtained new evidence for dynamical space by applying correlation analysis to a year of data from a Random Event Generator (REG) device located in Perth, Australia and from another in Muenster, Germany, recorded between July 1, 2012 and June 30, 2013. The results obtained are consistent with results obtained by applying similar analysis to data from a REG located in Manchester UK and the REG in Perth. Consequently evidence for dynamical space is mounting. For each day we applied correlation analysis to determine travel times for putative waves. Then wave speed and direction, over each 24 hour period, were determined by fitting to the observed travel times, theoretical curves of how travel times would vary with Earth rotation. We thereby derived an average incoming RA, declination and speed for the waves of each day. A probability density plot of the incoming directions exhibited a peak near RA = 4.5 h, consistent with previous determinations of incoming space flow direction by Reginald Cahill and Dayton Miller. Moreover, removing Earth orbital and gravitational inflow velocities from the observed wave velocities allowed a peak of higher density to be obtained, which is consistent with predictions of Dynamical 3-Space theory. The peak indicated a most probable incoming galactic direction of RA = 4.50 h, dec = -80.6 deg. Probability density plots of speeds indicated a most probable incoming galactic speed of 502 km/s.”

I present this blog to you as a statement. It is a statement not only because of the explicit [local] contents herein but also in respect the words cited in my blogs entitled “Why is there no precise dividing line between microscopic and macroscopic phenomena” and “The inescapable duality of all “things”“.

My closing statement

With respect to the Michelson and Morely experiment I have described how and why the variations of measurements have occurred with not only the 1867 Michelson and Morely experiment but also those of Miller and other scientists over time as well. Furthermore by doing this I have demonstrated why some relativity theories have probably been constructed upon inappropriate foundational premises because they do not take into account that a common cosmic continuum could exist, such as ether, Bohm’s Holomovement premise and other continuums like them as well.

I have provided you with reliable evidence (science) that informationally and experimentally demonstrates my point of view with respect to  the 1887 Michelson and Morely ether experiment.  I have shown that the Michelson and Morely experiment was never a nul result in the first place as many contemporary physicists claim. The material and ideas in this blog bring into question certain features of Einstein’s theory of Special Relativity theory. I am not saying that Einstein was completely wrong with his ideas. However, I am saying that reliable informational evidence now shows that space is a material like foam with fluid like properties. These fluid like properties are the ‘ether’ that Einstein said could not exist.

The awareness model of physics

A new understanding about reality science

The Awareness Model of Physics [Primordial-Awareness, i.e. PA] considers the concept of physical reality at its deepest level. It presents ideas that are considered mostly without merit in the wider physics community. This is because such ideas cannot be tested by conventional scientific experiments. I focus my attention by looking at reality science as being one that is informational because it removes the need for me to be unduly prescriptive and descriptive with my use of language. Furthermore I think that by doing so my readers are likely to better follow my line of thinking even though they may not fully understand the wider message that I am attempting to convey to them.

I have written numerous articles with respect to my beliefs about informational science. Because of this I will not go into undue informational detail in this blog today. My position is that I have firm ideas about what scientific reality may look and feel like and so it can be described and discussed as such. The following chart provides scientific insight into the deepest levels of my thinking with respect to holistic Awareness physics. It provides a platform for the short and more informative discussion that follows it.

My discussion about this chart is in two parts. These are:

1] Informational matters that relate to the pre Big Bang epoch

2] Informational matters that relate to the post Big Bang epoch

Part 1: Informational matters that relate to the pre Big Bang epoch

The sub-quantum level of informational reality is Primordial-Awareness (PA). PA is without time. PA has a self organising property that lead to a neural-network type of structure. This organising property was influenced by means of the effect of a thought. [Thought] Thoughts are influences that are not bound by the laws of quantum theory. For purposes of descriptive simplicity they can be best described as being an undetectable effect emanating from a neutral charge that informationally means something. This something might be the symbol of i that science commonly recognises as being the “something” [matrix] within all “things” that might exist. It is from this thought that the condition of patterns of thoughts emerged that became both effects [something that exists] and the effects of thoughts.

These affects and effects were also influenced by the self organising properties of PA. Both single thoughts and patterns of thoughts mean something in with relation to PA. This is because each thought has a short-term memory that causes them to have a minimal intuitive sense of self-awareness and self-guidance. This is in respect to themselves as well as PA. This also means self meaning, relevance and embryonic self-importance. In other words the PA and thought nexus became an ever increasingly semantic process of self referential informational construction.

In this process weaker thoughts that the system itself did not feel were conducive to the well being and further development of the wider system were discarded and allowed to die. This includes branches emanating from such weak thoughts. This is more particularly so because such weak thoughts had no further meaning to the system as a whole. As the thought neural network system began to further evolve and grow the system began to intuitively sense that it was not only just a condition that could effect itself but it also had its own energy type. When the system realised this it then morphologically [relating to the form or structure of things] learned to not only understand itself by means of its own energy but also adapt itself to speculate about its own sense of purpose and wider ability to do “things”. The word speculate here means to test new and safer growth enhancement opportunities and potential on behalf of itself. It remains intuitive as it had been all along since it separated from the effect of the neutral charge. Each wider system-effect of speculation became a junction-point [node] of new opportunities and growth to do something.

These new opportunities and growth became not only new nodes of informational action relating to growth and the stunting and destruction of existing growth in order to keep itself “healthy”. This is in line with what I said earlier. This is as though it were a human neural network system. Each node can be seen as though it were a neuron maintaining and expanding its own infinitesimally small ‘patch’ of the wider reality PA system. These nodes can also be seen as cells. These cells are influenced by means of the wider inherent energy within the system itself. These cells also have their own meaning of some type. They also have meaning with respect to their being differing energy types, influences and effects. This means that the PA neural network system is informationally dynamic. This means it has the capacity to influence a great number of types of structure and also the diverse range of ever-growing energy types that helps it to be innovative and informationally constructive. This also means becoming ever more aware of its own holistic self as a single matrix of informational something.

This countless number of energy types (together with these same allied processes) morphologically manifested themselves as patterns of pixels but not observable ones. In other words the original node junctions I talked about are embryonic sub-quantum elementary particles. Each pixel, together with their own short lived memory also began self organisation themselves into patterns. These patterns in turn organise themselves into clusters and packages of self referential information that mean something with respect to the wider PA neural network system itself. This information, together with its inherent energy derived from within itself influences the employment of its own new wide range of energy types to influence the emergence of electrons of energy. These new electrons of energy became separately referential to the clusters and packages of pixels. In other words electrons became entangled with the pixels from which they were influenced and conditioned by in the first place.

It is this entangled relationship between pixels and electrons that became an ever growing and meaningful field of information with respect to PA that had become the continuum for the reality system. This new and ever growing entangled information system became more adventurous and creative with itself. This is to the extent that the combined natural energy of the system, together with the unknowable diversity of energy types that emerged from the primary energy condition in the first place, became entangled into a single system of a matrix of informational oneness. This informational oneness embraces all the inherent informational experiential knowledge that I have talked about within the wider PA system thus far.

You will notice that I have included the energy type of electrons as being a central player in my description of the ever expanding and ever greater diversity of the condition of informational reality. This is the reality that I have entangled with PA in order to give informational reality a descriptive meaning, purpose and some type of a without time future. It is this entangled relationship between PA and my description of informational reality that is the fundamental ether relating to all that ‘IS’ within the wider matrix of entangled reality. This matrix is motionless. All things and events are relational to the ether. This includes our 3D dimension. Our Earth moves through this same “sea” just as Einstein believed it would need to do in order to validate his theory of general relativity. It is this same ether type, but not necessarily the same type of condition, that is the inherent ether of our 3D universe. For purposes of convenience I have chosen to avoid widening the scope of this reality ether effect to include other universes and dimensions. However, it is because of this unknowable and monumental concentration of energy types and associated diversity of informational processes and event related thereto that influenced the wider condition of PA informational reality to be as randomly explosively as it is bound to be. By this I mean by means of influencing the conditions and effects for the evolution and creation of universes and dimensions.

Part 2: Informational matters that relate to the post Big Bang epoch

In the post Big Bang epoch the pre Big Bang ether ‘field’ retained its PA entangled relationship with electrons. This includes the short-lived informational memories brought forward by electrons in their relationship with the massive diversion of energy of the Big Bang. In the post Big Bang epoch new information was influenced to be created along the same lines as it was in the pre Big Bang epoch. All new different energy types, conditions, influences and effects were ‘born’ that related to a 3D geometric universe. These same energy types and their associated conditions then became related to objects, events, movement, velocity and time as it relates to clocks and the speed of light. It is the ‘natural’ ether of PA (like a sea) that became the ‘motor’ that ‘fired-up’ the universe as we understand it to be. The natural PA ether retained its entangled state with electrons. The PA ether retained its motionless state as it was in the pre Big Bang epoch. Furthermore conceptual pixels of knowledge and information then became the physical means through which the universe can be said to be both aware of itself as well as all ‘things’ and events that are taking place at any given time. Within this process PA remains without time but pixels of information are both with and without time as pixels were originally derived from PA by means of the original pre Big Bang entangled patterns of thoughts processes that I have discussed and explained.

It is from this informational ether energy type nexus that different energy types (including conditions) emerged that were relevant to a 3D geometric reference frame. The ether became the energy type and influence for all ‘things’ related to the new 3D geometric reference frame. This included the energy effect of magnetism that was one of the energy effects that emanated from the Big Bang explosion. It is the nexus relationship between electrons and their associated short term spin memories with magnetism that created the necessary energy field type for the effect of electrical energy fields (electricity) to emerge. This includes the conditions for negative, positive and (temporary) neutral charge that gives ‘dynamic- life’, meaning and purpose to the wider 3D universal system. This is a system centred upon and entangled with the concept of PA entangled informational ether. It is this wide ranging entangled form of informational 3D ether that is the informational link to the pre Big Bang type of reality PA ether. PA is the dynamic (essential) common link between the two. It is the common awareness between the two that has no boundaries. It is important for you to note that there is no precise dividing line between microscopic and macroscopic phenomena. This in turn further supports my idea that all “things” are somehow entangled with each other.

I urge you to peruse my blog entitled “Albert Einstein and the great ether debate” with respect to you better understanding the confusion that exists in the physics community as to whether historical Ether theory is a valid theory of not. Also with respect to Ether theory you are urged to review my statement concerning my views relating to why I think Ether theory should be incorporated into wider contemporary physics modeling.

The Awareness Model is supported by an experiment.

Readers should know that the major difference between the Awareness model and the Hiley-Bohm models of physics is that the Hiley-Bohm model has been mathematically constructed to be compatible with the Relativity model of physics whereas the Awareness model is validated by a described experiment. The Hiley-Bohm model also embraces all phenomena whatsoever in a single reality-frame. [The Process physics model does this as well].

Here is a summery of the key points in the immediate foregoing words as they relate to the 3D universe as well as the subsequent consequences they have in the universe.

1. The universe is undivided and is aware of itself and of all ‘things’ and events taking place within it.

2. All things and events are somehow connected to each other by means of physics quantum entanglement theory.

3. All things and events are both informational and have energy as well. This includes information that is a condition and effect of thoughts that include imagination.

4. The universe has intelligence and thus there are hidden geometric forms in the universe that help to not only understand the universe itself and what the rules of nature might be.

5. All things and events in the universe are in ever-changing densities, averages and ratios with each other and as thus they are representational of the holistic nature of the universe.

6. The natural backdrop to reality (inertia) is Primordial-Awareness.

7. There are two concurrent times in the universe. One is clock time and the other one is without time.

8. Forces are by-products of objects and events.

9. The principle energy force of the universe is unknowable but it is describable. It simply ‘IS’

10. Space is like a web of limitless interpenetrating fields that can be demonstrated to be functions, energy types with their associated conditions, influences and effects.

11. It is not known in physics science how electrons maintain their structural integrity and furthermore it does not yet know where mass or charge come from. (I say that they come from the dynamic nature of PA).

12. There is nothing smaller in physics than elementary particles like electrons. Electrons are structureless so they are not crushable because they have nothing to crush into. This is why elementary particles like electrons, quarks and gluons are the fundamental building blocks of the universe. Without them the ‘contents’ of the universe would largely not exist. This is why the short lived informational spins of electrons might be seen as the analogical father of all elementary particles in the 3D universe. They are without structure and uncrushable because they are the natural pixels of the matrix of informational PA reality. (They are called point particles in physics).

13.The electromagnetic field (fields within fields) can be seen to be something like analogical entangled fog particles that fill all of space. It exists in every reference frame of space and moment in time. The electromagnetic field can be seen to be stationary with respect to itself and only moves when fields of (from yet to be discovered scientifically sources) charge that ‘influence’ to move at different velocities. These velocities are related to the strength of the field of charge that mean something. This means the PA ether field.

14. Electricity might best be seen as an inert condition and influence relating to the stationary electromagnetic field. This is when this electricity condition and influence becomes an electrical field effect of its own (electricity). This is at the point when the electromagnetic field moves with respect to any nearby energy field of charge. The strength of the electrical field (electricity) is related to the speed of the electromagnetic field in relation to the charge of the field.

15. Electrons in the ether field have natural spin. This spin has a short-term memory. This stored information is transferred by electrical impulses to the nuclei of minerals like phosphorus that also have informational spin. The spin of the phosphorus nuclei have a much longer memory span that that of the spin of electrons. It is this entangled relationship between the PA ether fields that influence both the energy and types of energy that allows our mind and brains to think.

16. There is an inescapable duality of all “things” in the universe [and probably wider reality as well].

Appendices:

The relationship between the Awareness model of physics and a supporting experiment

I care to talk about entanglement

Albert Einstein and the great ether debate

Why is there no precise dividing line between microscopic and macroscopic phenomena?

The inescapable duality of all “things”

This blog forms a unit of information with respect to my conceptual unity theory.