And I should add this video too, about the Fine structure constant 1/137. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RCSSgxV9qNw
Like the other video it also uses Feynman diagrams, it doesn't directly mention the Lamb shift but it states that strength of electromagnetic fields is again related to all the possible outcomes with Feynman diagrams. That means that the strength of the electromagnetic force in a Vacuum IS (or is somehow perfectly and impossibly coincidental with) the polarization of virtual particles in space. In other words this is a confirmation beyond a shadow of a doubt that the permittivity of space, the ability of it to carry an electrical field is a result of it's substantive nature, of the polarization of virtual particles and the resultant fields (displacement current). Quantum field theory turns the particle into waves but there is still the same phenomena just looked at differently and actually it creates multiple aethers for every particle. Note that we do know virtual particles can become real particles by moving a mirror: *"By changing the position of a mirror inside a vacuum, virtual particles can be transformed into real photons that can be experimentally observed. In a vacuum, there is energy and noise, the existence of which follows the uncertainty principle in quantum mechanics." * So virtual particles are real however you want to think of them, they form a type of aether. The Casimir effect is real. The substantiveness of the vacuum is real, experimentally verified frame dragging confirms it, everything does. And again, Special Relativity has no mechanism to make the speed of light C in all frames and so it cannot possibly be, there is no mechanism proposed to do so. On Wed, 19 Oct 2022 at 09:38, Jonathan Berry <jonathanberry3...@gmail.com> wrote: > To clarify what I am talking about regarding virtual particles being > polarized in space, and it giving the best prediction in Science and the > lamb shift for those who haven't here is a good video from Veritasium. > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g20JZ2HNZaw > > > > On Wed, 19 Oct 2022 at 02:39, Chris Zell <chrisz...@wetmtv.com> wrote: > >> Thanks for bringing this up. I always wondered how aether isn’t >> supposedly real yet space/vacuum has measurable properties concerning EMF. >> >> >> >> Maybe someday a discussion of lightning/thunderstorms will pop up as I >> find nothing credible about cloud electrification ideas. >> >> >> >> *From:* bobcook39...@hotmail.com <bobcook39...@hotmail.com> >> *Sent:* Monday, October 17, 2022 6:24 PM >> *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com >> *Subject:* RE: [Vo]:Arguments for an "Aether" >> >> >> >> Electric permittivity and magnetic megmiabilityu of space necessary to >> calculate the speed of light support the physical model of space and hence >> the concept of an anther. >> >> >> >> Bob Cook >> >> >> >> Sent from Mail >> <https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgo.microsoft.com%2Ffwlink%2F%3FLinkId%3D550986&data=05%7C01%7CChrisZell%40wetmtv.com%7C721c9a2f8cc747bc92a208dab08e48e2%7C9e5488e2e83844f6886cc7608242767e%7C0%7C0%7C638016422431994269%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=V4CtpJadrYF0P5LujylOqmG%2BFbgVJswobXvNgbVTk%2Bk%3D&reserved=0> >> for Windows >> >> >> >> *From: *Jonathan Berry <jonathanberry3...@gmail.com> >> *Sent: *Tuesday, October 11, 2022 12:04 PM >> *To: *vortex-l@eskimo.com >> *Subject: *Re: [Vo]:Arguments for an "Aether" >> >> >> >> Well if you consider all of the possible interactions that could happen >> with so-called virtual particles (whatever quantum field theory might call >> them) it calculates the exact value and is the "most successful >> calculation/prediction in physics". I can't judge the relative value of >> the model you mention but I would argue that even if it somehow explains >> away for example Lamb shift, how would other phenomena that give evidence >> of a substantive and energetic nature to space be discounted? >> >> >> >> For example the Casimir effect, are you saying this isn't a result of >> eliminating certian frequency modes in the Quantum field? >> >> >> >> And the permitivity of free space and displscement current in a vacuum, >> are you saying there is nothing in the vacuum to be displaced? (polarized) >> >> >> >> There is a lot more than just Lamb shift that nerds to be explained away. >> >> >> >> On Wed, 12 Oct 2022, 1:23 am Jürg Wyttenbach, <ju...@datamart.ch> wrote: >> >> So we know that the electric field from the Nucleus of a Hydrogen Nucleus >> can polarize the virtual particles and cause partial shielding, this >> results in the Lamb shift. >> >> This is standard model word salad. Virtual particles are just a >> mathematical construct an thus never something real. >> >> >> >> Lamb shift only happens inside a field so this is a forced interaction. >> We can exactly calculate the Proton fine structure frequency (See basics in >> Mills but needs some metric added..) from first principle and there we use >> no virtual particles. >> >> All non circular orbits have two extremes what explains the shift in >> min/max energy. >> >> Hence no ether or other fantasy needed. >> >> J.W. >> >> >> >> >> >> On 11.10.2022 11:01, Jonathan Berry wrote: >> >> I would like to hear any counter points to these arguments. >> >> >> >> Firstly the Aether I am talking about IS NOT NECESSARILY the >> Luminiferous Aether/Ether considered disproven, though some arguments will >> go in that direction also. >> >> >> >> Hence the "Aether" in question could be Quantum fields theory, virtual >> particles, cold neutrinos, dark matter, Dirac sea etc... or *anything >> in or of space* (or space-time) besides matter and light/radiation. >> >> Therefore there isn't really any reason to discount it based on the label >> Aether as it is being used as a catch all, some of which are beyond doubt. >> >> I would also note that the space of General Relativity is affected by >> matter and light and motion can be induced in it, such as frame dragging. >> >> >> >> And also I will be first addressing that light might potentially affect >> such phenomena. >> >> >> >> So we know that the electric field from the Nucleus of a Hydrogen Nucleus >> can polarize the virtual particles and cause partial shielding, this >> results in the Lamb shift. >> >> Also displacement current through a vacuum and the very >> dielectric properties of the vacuum suggest there is something to be >> affected. >> >> Many have entertained the ideas of Bearden and Scalar waves which propose >> to affect space with electromagnetic fields interfering. >> >> Matter is 99.99999% empty space and so if matter has any potential >> ability to affect anything in the vacuum likely that would be from the >> 99.99999% of the volume that is just electromagnetic flux, also if Matter >> plays a necessary part, as long as the experiment is not performed in a >> vacuum matter will be present even if it isn't the structured component. >> >> Light manifests a tiny gravitational field according to conventional >> theory, indeed it must due to the fact it carries momentum and can be >> diverted by gravity if Newlon's laws are to survive.. >> >> Light introduced into an otherwise massless perfectly reflective box >> would, due to Doppler shift imbalancing radiation pressure, inertial mass >> now be apparent. >> >> Light has the ability to push, warm and cut matter so why should we doubt >> it's influence on other phenomena? >> >> >> >> >> >> So we should all be able to agree on two things: >> >> >> >> There are phenomena in the background of space that certainly DO exist >> that aren't matter or light. See also >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8kCtiOS_F_M&t=7s >> <https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3D8kCtiOS_F_M%26t%3D7s&data=05%7C01%7CChrisZell%40wetmtv.com%7C721c9a2f8cc747bc92a208dab08e48e2%7C9e5488e2e83844f6886cc7608242767e%7C0%7C0%7C638016422431994269%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=vOV2axAwI6U%2BsjsEyCefDIo7oHJO%2FNuZM3ATNdN1ucI%3D&reserved=0> >> >> And Light (EM) could conceivably influence said phenomena. >> >> >> >> So first a little consideration to a Lumiferious Aether. It is known >> that the speed of light is C, but those who dig a little deeper recognize >> that the claim is only related to the 2 way speed of light, the round >> trip. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTn6Ewhb27k >> <https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DpTn6Ewhb27k&data=05%7C01%7CChrisZell%40wetmtv.com%7C721c9a2f8cc747bc92a208dab08e48e2%7C9e5488e2e83844f6886cc7608242767e%7C0%7C0%7C638016422431994269%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=w3FKW4bbTcZ9pQSbZ9SvaB0fC1bg4Pdjwxjsthrg6XA%3D&reserved=0> >> >> The thing is Lorentz contraction (Lorentz Aether Theory, LET) was only >> conceived of as a means to make the round trip constant and it made no >> pretense that it could keep the one way speed of light constant. >> >> Well, the thing is Special Relativity has absolutely no mechanism that >> can make the one way speed of light constant! It just argues that you >> cannot measure the one way speed of light so live with it. >> >> It plays a game of "if you can't easily measure the difference it doesn't >> exist, but this is impossible, it is a cheat and it is a cop-out. >> >> >> >> However, because there is no possible, no conceivable mechanism by which >> the one-way speed of light can ACTUALLY be C in all directions in all >> frames, then we must accept that it is in fact NOT equal in all frames even >> if we have difficulty proving what it is or finding said frame. >> >> >> >> So as the speed of light is actually dependent on the frame you are in, >> we can also put aside all the other impossibilities of Special Relativity, >> we can now consider that time dilation is an absolute thing and this is >> good as there are easy ways to create impossible paradoxes. >> >> >> >> Anyway if you want to, you can actually measure the one-way speed of >> light. What you need to do is Synchronize 2 or more clocks when they are >> together, now if you can establish the direction of your motion through the >> prefered frame that is great as moving each clock away from each other >> perpendicular to this axis motion through the prefered frame so any time >> dilation is equal, if you have not established this (and don't want to >> repeat the experiment in multiple different orientations then sure the >> clocks will go a little out of synch but that's not the end of the world. >> >> >> >> Then when the clocks are apart you install them in either end of your >> train laboratory, then you accelerate to a significant velocity when both >> clocks read the same time. >> >> The reason this works is because the amount of desynchronization that >> occurs when the motion relative to the prefered frame is tiny only a very >> tiny desynchronization occurs (if any at all), but once our laboratory is >> moving at a significant percentage of the speed of light any efforts to >> separate synchronized clocks leads to much greater disparities. >> >> >> >> But again, if the clocks are separated perpendicular to their motion >> though such a prefered frame (medium) then the time dilation would be equal >> and not desynchronize them in the least. >> >> >> >> If you wanted to try and establish what the prefered frame is, you could >> put some very accurate high frequency clocks around a wheel, and to make it >> simply let's think of this in 2D. >> >> As the wheel rotates a given point on it is moving directly opposite the >> motion through the prefered frame and as such the time dilation is the >> greatest as the motion through the frame is the greatest, and then 180 >> degrees around the motion would be in the same direction and as such the >> velocity would be the slowest relative to the prefered frame and as such >> time would move the fastest. >> >> As such one could learn the exact axis of motion through the prefered >> frame. >> >> >> >> There are also ways to prove that time dilation must not be relative >> because if it were parties on opposite sides of a rotating carousel would >> agree the other is always moving relative to themselves and each would >> expect the other to experience the slowest time, the fact is that time >> dilation being relative breaks down completely as long as communication is >> not in the direction of movement, as this removes Doppler effects which >> confuses matters. Communication transverse to the velocity creates either >> over moments or on opposite sides of a rotating platform for as long as you >> want an unresolvable paradox. >> >> >> >> >> >> Ok, so there must be a prefered frame because SR has no mechanism by >> which the speed of light can be the same in all directions in all frames. >> >> And for this reason and the unworkability of time dilation without a >> prefered frame then we have both time dilation and length contraction as a >> result of moving through a prefered frame. >> >> >> >> This begs a question, is the prefered frame affecting matter, time, and >> length but is itself unaffected by matter?! >> >> It seems inconceivable that length, time could be affected without the >> frame being affected. >> >> >> >> And therefore we can assert that the prefered frame (The >> Luminiferous Aether) is compressed by matter, but it seems undeniable to >> say that it is therefore dragged and generally impressed upon by matter. >> >> >> >> As such it is an impressionable medium. >> >> More-over so should anything else... PhD Comics video linked earlier: >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8kCtiOS_F_M&t=7s >> <https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3D8kCtiOS_F_M%26t%3D7s&data=05%7C01%7CChrisZell%40wetmtv.com%7C721c9a2f8cc747bc92a208dab08e48e2%7C9e5488e2e83844f6886cc7608242767e%7C0%7C0%7C638016422431994269%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=vOV2axAwI6U%2BsjsEyCefDIo7oHJO%2FNuZM3ATNdN1ucI%3D&reserved=0> >> >> >> >> Of course when it comes to my own fringe efforts, there is another hurdle >> or 2, the fact that the human body can detect such phenomena though not >> unreasonable and not unpresidented (every culture has a claim and practices >> for such an energetic phenomena), it still has to be addressed. >> >> >> >> And then there is possible doubt that even if you accept the existence of >> something to be affected (you must), the ability of light to have an effect >> (you should), and the ability of the human body to detect such an effect >> (you could), why would the specific designs I have do anything? >> >> >> >> All I can answer is to say that many have felt it. >> >> >> >> Maybe you will too? >> https://www.reddit.com/r/Aetheric_Engineering/comments/xy8th7/stupidly_strong/ >> <https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FAetheric_Engineering%2Fcomments%2Fxy8th7%2Fstupidly_strong%2F&data=05%7C01%7CChrisZell%40wetmtv.com%7C721c9a2f8cc747bc92a208dab08e48e2%7C9e5488e2e83844f6886cc7608242767e%7C0%7C0%7C638016422431994269%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=UGk06CPDd3jRi8B9Zb%2BOaIFnOVV99sI33W8rESf0T6s%3D&reserved=0> >> >> >> >> Place your palm to the screen, some will feel it, some won't. It might >> take a minute, the center of the palm (somewhat tensed) to the center of >> the design moving to and from the screen. >> >> The reason the effect can project from the screen is because the dynamics >> when setup in a 2D form project the influence out, this also happens >> generally from a metal ring, and certainly from an extended form like a >> cylinder (think cloud buster) which does project the form out the end. >> >> >> >> Anway, not really expecting 'converts', but I would like to know what if >> anything I might have got provable wrong? >> >> What was unclear? >> >> >> >> Did anyone read any of this? >> >> >> >> Jonathan, every few years I post here. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Jürg Wyttenbach >> >> Bifangstr. 22 >> >> 8910 Affoltern am Albis >> >> >> >> +41 44 760 14 18 >> >> +41 79 246 36 06 >> >> >> >> >> >> *CAUTION:* This message was sent from outside the Nexstar organization. >> Please do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the >> sender. >> >
