sci.physics.electromag

On 10 =C1=D0=D2, 10:21, Benj wrote:
> On Apr 9, 8:54 pm, Laurent wrote:
>
> > I am starting to think that matter pops up where there is too little
> > or less dense, as if it were Nature fighting against fragmentation,
> > giving rise to objects like Seyferts and Quasars where it is less
> > dense and black holes where there is too much.
>
> There is the "bud" theory of matter, but I used to hang with a
> physicist who used to always say that "electrons don't exist"! His
> theory (and it's not a particularly new one) was that electrons
> actually ARE the proverbial "true vacuum" of space represented by a
> "hole" in the aether. Matter supposedly works like this. electrons
> are vortexes in space that in fact open a "true vacuum" hole and hence
> are actually LESS than nothing. The vortex in the aether that creates
> this hole actually spews aether out in to the fourth dimension. That
> "wormhole" actually arcs over and comes to rest on a positive charge.
> Now protons are NOT vortex "hole" entities, but rather tiny "frozen"
> bits of solid aether. Light and radiation tend to cause them to want
> to expand back up to a gaseous state but the aether supplied by the
> electron's "wormholes" stabilizes the Proton and hence one gets what
> we see as matter with a reasonable degree of stability. "Atomic"
> energy is actually simply the energy represented by the mass of the
> proton expanding back to a gaseous state. You can see that
> electrostatic "coulomb" forces are actually due to the elasticity of
> the aether-transporting wormhole in the 4th dimension.
>
> That's it.

Yes, your friend is right. When we are talking about the aether, in
the first place we must determine what does it mean. Maybe we are
looking for it in the wrong places.
Talking about observability of the aether, we must ask ourselves
whether only it is observable and all other objects including us
ourselves are only its singularities and made up from it.
The same we are to say about space. What is the space we are living
in? Is it 3D as we can observe or maybe it has more dimension? From
the answer all depends. The 3D space is perambulated up and down by
coryphaei, so it is need to go further.
As for SR, it has been already shown as the first step that there is
another approach to the Lorentz transformation without peculiar
postulates,length contraction and time dilation. One needs just to add
one spatial dimension to our visual space. Then some consequencies
about all the nature including particles and galaxies represented by
vorteces (not in the very space, but in some medium situated in
space) can be made.
Look into vps137.narod.ru/physics.html.