Matter is simply a perceived consequence of electromagnetic phenomena—an illusion rather than something that truly exists. There is no actual matter. Mother Nature is not a calculator nor operates in discrete terms; rather, these are objective frameworks we impose when observing matter. The behavior of nature and our brains are distinct, as our conscious minds tend to segment continuous phenomena into discrete categories. This tendency mirrors the way we design technologies, such as computers, to process and count information.
Field theory and atomism
In the history of science, two primary conceptual approaches have shaped our understanding of the natural world: matter-based views and field-based views. Matter-based views, or atomism, focus on the idea that matter is composed of discrete, indivisible particles called atoms. In contrast, field-based views emphasize the continuous nature of forces and interactions that permeate space, such as gravitational and electromagnetic fields. These perspectives have evolved over centuries, each contributing uniquely to the development of modern scientific theories.
Atomism traces its origins to ancient Greek philosophers like Leucippus and Democritus, who first proposed that all matter consists of tiny, indivisible particles. This idea was revived during the Renaissance and gained substantial support in the 17th century through the works of scientists like Pierre Gassendi. The 19th century saw significant advancements with John Dalton's atomic theory and Dmitri Mendeleev's periodic table, which organized elements based on atomic weights. The discovery of the electron by J.J. Thomson and the nuclear model of the atom proposed by Ernest Rutherford further refined our understanding of atomic structure. Quantum mechanics, developed in the early 20th century, provided a comprehensive framework for understanding the behavior of atoms and subatomic particles.
Field-based views have roots in early speculation by philosophers like Thales and Anaximander, who hinted at field-like concepts. Later, philosophers such as Plato and Aristotle contributed to ideas that can be seen as precursors to field theories. Aristotle's concept of the "aether" as the fifth element and Plato's emphasis on ideal forms influencing the material world laid the groundwork for thinking about continuous influences in nature. Building on these ideas, the Neoplatonists, with their monistic view that all of reality emanates from a single source—the One—further developed the notion of interconnectedness and unity, which resonates with field-based perspectives that view the universe as a web of continuous, interconnected forces. The 17th century saw a major development with Isaac Newton's work on gravity, describing it as a force acting at a distance. This idea laid foundational concepts for later field theories. In the 19th century, Michael Faraday's concept of the electromagnetic field and James Clerk Maxwell's unification of electricity and magnetism, showing that light is an electromagnetic wave, marked a significant achievement in the development of field theory. In the late 20th century, Oleg Jefimenko further contributed to this tradition by exploring alternative interpretations of classical electromagnetic and gravitational fields, keeping the discussion of field-based theories alive.
The early 20th century brought about a major paradigm shift in scientific consensus with Albert Einstein's general theory of relativity, which described gravity as the curvature of space-time caused by mass and energy. Einstein's work was heavily promoted by the mainstream media and scientific institutional power structures, fundamentally changing the understanding of the universe and attempting to bridge the gap between atomism and field-based views. His contributions to the wave-particle duality concept, demonstrating that particles exhibit both particle and wave-like properties, attempted to unify these approaches and paved the way for modern quantum field theory.
The father of quantum mechanics and the wave-particle duality
Max Planck is often considered the father of quantum mechanics because he introduced the concept of quantization of energy in 1900, proposing that energy is measured in discrete units called "quanta." His work laid the foundation for the development of quantum theory, which was further expanded by Einstein, Bohr, and others.
In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, when Planck began his work, ether theory was still a widely accepted concept. Many physicists, including Planck, initially considered ether to be a necessary medium for the propagation of electromagnetic waves. Planck's early work was influenced by classical physics, which included the ether concept. When Planck introduced the idea of energy quanta in 1900 to explain blackbody radiation, he did not consider these quanta to be physical entities. He initially saw them as a mathematical tool—a statistical representation necessary for the correct prediction of radiation laws.
Following Albert Einstein's 1905 papers, particularly his work on the photoelectric effect where Einstein proposed that light could be understood as being composed of discrete packets of energy, or "quanta" (later called photons), Planck was reluctant to fully embrace Einstein's concept of wave-particle duality. This was a radical departure from the classical wave theory of light, which was widely accepted at the time.
When Max Planck was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1918 for his discovery of energy quanta, he was still working within the framework of classical physics, which included the ether theory. He did not reject the ether, as it was still widely accepted as the medium for electromagnetic wave propagation, and he still considered quanta as a statistical representation rather than a physical reality.
By 1919, Einstein was gaining massive media attention. Key institutions and prominent scientists, like Sir Arthur Eddington, who was a pacifist and internationalist, supported Einstein's theory. In the context of only weak gravitational fields, Eddington's 1919 eclipse expedition was an accepted confirmation of Einstein's prediction that light from stars would be bent by the gravitational field of the Sun—a phenomenon known as gravitational lensing—and was heavily publicized in the media, making Einstein a global celebrity. However, it was Einstein's work on wave-particle duality that had a profound impact on the development of quantum mechanics. This duality, which suggests that light and other forms of electromagnetic radiation exhibit both wave-like and particle-like properties, was an idea that Einstein helped to establish through his explanation of the photoelectric effect. Some might argue that the weight of this media attention and politics in science led Max Planck to eventually accept Einstein's notion of wave-particle duality. However, Planck was known for his integrity and commitment to science, and there is no strong historical evidence to suggest that external pressures influenced his shift in core scientific views regarding his discovery of energy quanta.
During the early 20th-century period, mainstream science shifted from monistic concepts, which sought to explain phenomena through a single framework, to dualistic approaches. This shift was driven largely by the advent of quantum mechanics and wave-particle duality, where light and matter are thought to exhibit both wave-like and particle-like properties. Classical physics, which adhered to monistic views like the wave theory of light, has since been largely abandoned in physics but is still widely used in engineering practice.
Applications of space-time and quantum mechanics in engineering
Considering Max Planck's original stance on "quanta" as a statistical tool rather than as something that physically exists, quantum mechanics aligns more with the realms of statistics and computational theory than with physical reality. There are no practical applications of general relativity or quantum mechanics in engineering, as there are no known methods for manipulating the "space-time" field or applying the mathematics of quantum mechanics in practical engineering contexts.
There are theoretical proposals for technologies designed to manipulate space-time, such as concepts involving warp drives or wormholes. However, these ideas remain speculative, with no known practical methods or technologies having been developed to apply such manipulations. Unlike well-established fields like electromagnetism, which have seen extensive practical applications and technological advancements, the space-time field remains purely theoretical, with no historical precedent for its practical use.
The advancement of quantum mechanics, especially in the context of quantum computing, has largely been driven by mathematical theory and computational problem-solving rather than costly physical experiments like particle accelerators. Foundational principles and quantum algorithms emerged from abstract mathematics and theoretical predictions, demonstrating that significant progress in quantum theory can be achieved without relying on expensive physical setups. Further expanding quantum mechanics does not require investment in billion-dollar particle accelerators, but rather continued focus on theoretical and computational approaches.
Classical physics principles are still extensively used in the field of microprocessor and circuit design. Engineers rely on classical concepts such as Ohm's Law, Kirchhoff's laws, and electromagnetism for circuit analysis and design, thermodynamics for thermal management, and classical mechanics for the physical design and packaging of microprocessors. These classical principles are indispensable for ensuring the reliability, efficiency, and performance of microprocessors, demonstrating that classical physics remains a cornerstone in the practical aspects of this advanced technology.
Classical fields better describe the nature of a quantum computer in practical engineering terms as they provide an intuitive framework for understanding qubit behavior. Electromagnetic fields, governed by Maxwell's equations, already explain the wave-like and interference patterns observed in qubits without needing to invoke the probabilistic nature of quantum mechanics. This field-based view aligns more closely with how qubits are physically manipulated in practical devices, highlighting the continuity and coherence inherent in their operations.
Observing particle behavior
Observing subatomic particles and phenomena, including protons, neutrons, electrons, quarks, leptons, neutrinos, and various types of radioactive decay such as alpha, beta, gamma decay, and more, requires the use of electromagnetic instruments. These instruments are fundamental to both the creation of high-energy conditions needed to study subatomic particles and the measurement of the resulting phenomena. They exploit the interactions of energy fields with electromagnetic forces to accelerate, detect, and analyze theorized subatomic particles and the radiation they emit. Importantly, all studies and observations of these entities and processes are conducted indirectly through the lens of electromagnetic instruments, meaning our understanding of these phenomena is entirely mediated by electromagnetic interactions, rather than direct observation.
Particle colliders, such as the Large Hadron Collider (LHC), are essential tools for studying the nature of what are termed subatomic particles and their interactions. In these colliders, electromagnetic instruments are used to accelerate these entities to near-light speeds by applying powerful electromagnetic fields. These fields guide and focus them along specific paths before they are made to collide. The high-energy collisions that result do not allow physicists to observe these entities directly; instead, they study them indirectly by analyzing the data collected by electromagnetic detectors. These detectors capture the traces and radiation emitted from the collisions, which are then interpreted to theorize about the properties and behaviors of the short-lived and otherwise inaccessible phenomena.
Phenomena like beta decay, where a supposed transformation occurs within an atomic nucleus while emitting certain types of radiation, or alpha decay, where a nucleus releases another form of radiation, are observed indirectly in controlled environments using electromagnetic detectors sensitive to the radiation emitted. In the case of gamma decay, where an excited nucleus releases high-energy radiation, gamma-ray detectors rely on electromagnetic principles to detect and measure the energy of this radiation. These detectors analyze the interactions within the detection system, often using processes like ionization or scintillation, to theorize about the occurrence of these otherwise invisible phenomena.
Other phenomena, such as certain forms of nuclear transformations and rare processes, are also studied indirectly using advanced electromagnetic technologies. These detectors are specifically designed to capture the rare and often faint signals associated with these events. Scientists study these phenomena indirectly by analyzing the data collected from electromagnetic sensors, which capture the subtle traces and signals produced during these interactions. For example, some elusive entities, which are challenging to detect due to their minimal interactions, are studied using massive underground detectors. These detectors pick up faint light signals, such as Cherenkov radiation, which are indirectly generated during these interactions. By interpreting these signals, scientists theorize about the presence and characteristics of the underlying processes and entities, although these theories are fundamentally based on electromagnetic observations rather than direct evidence of the phenomena themselves.
How about photons? Albert Einstein proposed the idea of wave-particle duality of light, suggesting that light could behave both as a wave and as a particle, which ultimately led to experiments like the double-slit experiment to explore this duality.
The instruments used in the single-photon version of the double-slit experiment typically include a laser providing a coherent light source, a double-slit apparatus made with precise measurements on the order of micrometers, a screen to capture the resulting pattern, and photon detectors placed behind each slit to determine if light passes through a particular slit. These photon detectors are highly sensitive devices like photomultiplier tubes or CCD sensors that can detect minuscule amounts of light.
Light passing through a single-slit apparatus will create a diffraction pattern, while light passing through a double-slit apparatus will create an interference pattern. This is the widely accepted behavior of electromagnetic waves, not particles.
So why all the commotion when these light waves are "observed" during the double-slit experiment? If no detector is placed at the slits, an interference pattern is seen on the screen. If a detector is placed at one or both slits to determine through which slit each "photon" passes, the wave function collapses due to the act of measuring the light passing through the slits. This phenomenon is not simply because the light was "observed," as most pop science tends to state; rather, it's a direct result of the instrument affecting the results of the experiment. For example, when air pressure is measured in a tire, some air is released from the tire as the measurement is made. This act of measurement is the same for light passing through two slits. Normally, when light waves pass through a double-slit apparatus, they overlap and create an interference pattern on the screen. However, when a photon detector measures the light passing through the slits, it causes the light to behave as if the slits are completely independent, resulting in two distinct diffraction patterns. Consciousness or the act of observing with your eyes has absolutely no effect on this experiment; instead, it's actually the instrument used to measure light passing through the slits that changes the results of the experiment.
Electromagnetic propagation is fundamentally a wave process, specifically a perturbation of the ether, and not bumping particle nor wave-particle duality phenomenon. Christian Huygens, one of the earliest proponents of the wave theory of light, proposed that light waves propagated through a medium he called the luminiferous ether. Thomas Young, famous for his double-slit experiment in 1801, provided strong evidence for the wave nature of light by demonstrating interference patterns. Augustin-Jean Fresnel, who further developed wave theory, introduced the concept of transverse waves, which could explain polarization—a property of light that could not be explained by the particle theory. Michael Faraday, famous for his discovery of the principle of electromagnetic induction, laid the groundwork for understanding light as an electromagnetic wave, where his experiments suggested a relationship between light and electromagnetic forces. James Clerk Maxwell, famous for his formulation of Maxwell's equations, a set of four fundamental equations still used today that describe the behavior of electric and magnetic fields, demonstrated that light is an electromagnetic wave, combining electric and magnetic fields oscillating together.
Ether and electromagnetism
The modern concept of the ether was theorized in the 19th century to explain how electromagnetic waves, such as light, could propagate through space. Since light and other forms of electromagnetic radiation were observed to travel through the vacuum of space, scientists hypothesized the existence of a “luminiferous ether” that would act as the medium for these waves.
When we discuss water waves, the waves are not a distinct entity but rather a description of the motion of water itself. Similarly, electromagnetic waves are a description of the motion of ether—electromagnetism and the ether are not distinct.
Just as flapping one's hands in a pool disturbs the water and sets it into motion, a disturbance in the ether causes its motion, giving rise to different forms of electromagnetism, including electrostatic and magnetostatic fields, as seen in direct currents, and electromagnetic waves, as seen in alternating currents. These static and propagating fields that exist between atoms, in turn, give rise to various electromagnetic behaviors when interacting with other atoms, such as dielectric properties, superconductivity, ferromagnetism, diamagnetism, and more.
The atom
Atoms can be understood as fundamental electromagnetic dynamos, where their existence is rooted entirely in electromagnetic interactions, rather than the traditional concept of matter. In this framework, there is no need for particles like protons or neutrons; instead, the atom is composed of intricate electromagnetic fields and forces. Central to this concept is the presence of an "ether," a pervasive medium that facilitates the propagation and interaction of these electromagnetic phenomena, both in the nucleus and the surrounding electric field. This ether provides the necessary medium for the electromagnetic fields that define the atom's structure and behavior, acting as the substrate through which energy and forces are transmitted.
At the core of the atom lies a region of intense electromagnetic activity, where concentrated positive charge generates powerful electric fields. These fields interact with the surrounding negatively charged regions, shaping the atom's overall structure and dynamics. In this model, the nucleus is not composed of physical particles but is instead a focal point of electromagnetic energy, acting as a "point source" that governs the interactions and organization of the surrounding fields. This structure can be compared to a stable, resonant system, like a vibrating string or a tuning fork, where the balance of forces and energy within the ether ensures the stability and persistence of the atom over time.
This focal point within the ether is incredibly dense due to the intense concentration of positive charge within an extremely small space, driven by the electromagnetic forces that maintain the nucleus's integrity. The high density and concentration of energy amplify the electromagnetic fields, resulting in a region of high capacitance. As the space in which energy is stored becomes smaller, the capacitance increases, further intensifying the energy concentration within the nucleus. The ether within the nucleus serves as the medium that supports this concentrated energy, ensuring that the electromagnetic forces remain balanced and stable. This can be likened to solitons or a torus vortex, where the nucleus resembles a self-reinforcing, stable wave or vortex within the ether. This structure maintains its form and energy through the intricate balance of internal dynamics, much like how solitons or toroidal vortices in fluids or fields sustain themselves over time.
The high capacitance of the nucleus is crucial in processes such as fusion and fission, where altering the electromagnetic binding forces within this dense region leads to the release of vast amounts of energy. The ether within the nucleus plays a fundamental role in how these electromagnetic waves, characterized by their wavelengths, propagate through the atom. Shorter wavelengths, associated with higher frequencies, correspond to greater energy storage and transmission within this confined space, emphasizing the powerful role of the nucleus in governing atomic energy dynamics. This perspective underscores that the energy and interactions observed in the atom are deeply influenced by the spatial and electromagnetic properties of the ether at its core.
Gravity
Ether theory was largely diminished after the acceptance of general relativity, as Einstein's theory eliminated the need for a static, all-pervasive medium (ether) to explain the propagation of light and the nature of space-time. General relativity described gravity as the curvature of space-time itself, making the concept of ether redundant. However, it's notable that in his 1905 theory of special relativity, Einstein did not explicitly reject ether; instead, he redefined it by implying that the concept of a luminiferous ether was unnecessary because the speed of light is constant in all inertial frames. Later, Einstein did acknowledge a kind of "ether" in general relativity, but this "ether" had no mechanical properties and was simply the structure of space-time itself.
Space-time replaced the Newtonian view of gravity through Einstein's general theory of relativity, which described gravity not as a force between masses, but as the curvature of space-time caused by the presence of mass and energy. However, prominent scientists like Oleg Jefimenko continued to develop and support extensions of Newton's theory, advocating for the concept of a dynamic ether and exploring gravitational and electromagnetic interactions within this framework. Jefimenko's work suggested that such a dynamic ether could account for phenomena like the bending of light around massive objects (similar to what is described as gravitational lensing in general relativity), the precise orbit of Mercury, and the time dilation effects crucial for GPS systems, highlighting that alternative interpretations and modifications of classical theories persisted alongside the acceptance of general relativity.
Based on Oleg Jefimenko's electromagnetic analogy of gravitational and cogravitational fields, the only real mathematical difference between electromagnetism and gravity is their symbols and constants. This analogy is often used in the weak-field limit of gravity, where the equations governing the gravitational field and the cogravitational field resemble Maxwell's equations for electromagnetism.
Jefimenko's theory of nonlinear gravitational fields and the electromagnetic analogy of gravitational and cogravitational field theory are distinct concepts. The electromagnetic analogy is primarily a theory to help understand certain aspects of gravity using familiar concepts from electromagnetism. Jefimenko's theory of nonlinear gravitational fields aims to provide a more accurate and complete description of gravitational phenomena, particularly in strong-field regimes.
In Causality, Electromagnetic Induction, and Gravitation, Jefimenko states in section 8-4 discussion, "all presently known results of the general relativity theory based on Einstein's field equation cannot be considered as reliable when these results involve gravitational fields whose gravitational-energy mass is comparable with the true mass of the system. And therefore the fact that the results obtained in this chapter are in conflict with the general relativity theory does in no way indicate that these results are wrong. The conflict cannot be resolved by plausibility arguments. Only reliable observational data can truly resolve it."
Jefimenko argues that the theory of nonlinear gravitational fields has indicated: 1. The gravitational force acting on a body in a gravitational field is determined not only by the mass of the field-producing body, but also by the gravitational field energy of the field-producing body. 2. Antigravitational bodies can exist in the universe. 3. The mass of the universe, of a galaxy, or of a stellar object can be much larger than the present astrophysical measurements indicate, since there can exist objects of negative or of zero apparent mass. The latter objects would constitute "hidden" masses insofar as they do not produce or experience gravitational effects. 4. "Black holes" cannot exist, and "gravitational collapse" is impossible. Indeed, according to the general relativity theory, a sphere creates an "unescapable" gravitational field and becomes a "black hole" after its radius becomes smaller than the "gravitational radius" but the radius of the central mass of the mass distribution shown in r_g = G(2M/c^2) is smaller than the gravitational radius, yet the field at this radius is zero rather than immensely strong, as is required for black holes. 5. Since "gravitational collapse" is impossible, and since antigravitational mass formations are possible, the normal state of the universe appears to be an alternating expansion and contraction. 6. Since a "hidden" mass is an object whose overall rest mass is zero, such a mass could conceivably move with a velocity equal to (or even larger than) the velocity of light.
Given the electromagnetic analogy in the weak-field approximation of gravitational fields, gravity can be considered another form of magnetic behavior caused by massive magnitudes. This behavior could crudely be considered a stacked phenomenon of electromagnetism, which necessitates a unique gravitational constant, distinct from Coulomb's constant for atomic electromagnetic interactions. Considering that capacitance increases as the space in which energy is stored decreases, the field behavior of these massive magnitudes should be, and indeed is, weaker than atomic-level electromagnetic behavior.
Conclusions about the nature of reality
1. Essence of matter: Matter is a manifestation of classical field phenomena rather than a fundamental substance. The perception of matter arises from complex electromagnetic interactions and fields rather than discrete particles. Our brains tend to segment continuous phenomena into discrete categories, a tendency that mirrors the way we design technologies like computers to process and count information. This segmentation contrasts with the fundamental continuity of nature, which is inherently seamless and uninterrupted.
2. Field-based interactions: The interactions between entities in the universe are governed by classical fields, with the ether serving as the medium through which these fields propagate and interact, rather than through direct contact between particles.
3. Capacitance and spatial dynamics: Capacitance, a measure of energy storage within a field, increases as the spatial region where energy is stored decreases.
4. Field analogies: Electromagnetic and gravitational fields are mathematically analogous in their weak-field limits, suggesting that gravity may be another form of magnetic behavior caused by massive magnitudes. Additionally, since observations of the strong and weak nuclear forces are made using electromagnetic instruments, these forces can be conceptualized as abstract forms of magnetic behavior within atoms, subject to various interpretations and potentially involving associated co-fields.
5. Quantum mechanics and classical physics: Quantum mechanics, while providing a statistical framework, aligns with classical physics in practical applications and can be understood through field-based concepts.
6. Technological limitations: Current technological limitations restrict our ability to directly manipulate and apply concepts from general relativity and quantum mechanics, focusing efforts on classical physics for practical engineering.