What to do with this page?
The page
David de Hilster has provided us with this tool suitable for a dialog between opinions. However, until now, the capacity has not been optimally used. I suggest that we should improve in 2 ways. We should look forwards more than backwards and use our site more for dialog and not only for advocating own ideas. We should be very grateful to Ricker for presenting a very interesting background for our work. This is a good start. He is a good writer. No is the time to take more interest in what modern technology can provide.
A theory must be internally true and consistent and not include absurdities like bending and contraction of space and dilation of time. But testing is only approximate and we should look for the best approximation. Therefore we should look for anomalies in order to improve our theories. It is absurd that scientists are spending lots of money on the existence of a Higgs particle but ignoring the existence of an ether. The are many anomalies and questions to solve.
- The behavior of the Pioneer space stations.
- The behavior of gravity during solar eclipses.
- The bending of light near our sun (if light has no mass).
- The behavior of atomic clocks (if time dilation is impossible).
- The cause of gravity.
Two ideas
I have presented an idea of a falling ether meaning that matter produces an ether wind in direction towards matter. This ether wind produces gravity and therefore the reference for light speed is not a frame but a field with spherical symmetry. The Pioneer anomaly is explained by the fact that the 2-way speed of light changes with distance to the Sun. The behavior of atomic clocks is explained by electrons accelerated by the ether wind changed speed transverse to the ether wind. Bending of light near our sun is explained by a gradient in the ether wind longitudinal to light.
I have presented another idea that the energy interchange between light and electrons is an illusion. Instead I regard light to be an agent that is transferring energy between ether and electrons. This explains destructive interference in light and also how bound electrons can radiate without loosing energy.
I should be very glad for opinions against (and for) these 2 ideas. I have got very little feedback so far.
John-Erik Persson
john.erik.persson@gmail.com
Written by John-Erik Persson
