None of the bizarre stagnation noted in modern self-confounding science is by accident. Jesuits literally exist to “counter” and extirpate Protestants and other heretics rebuking Vatican doctrine. America is mostly Protestant. Having anti-American Jesuits in-charge of “higher edu” has allowed present predicament with Every Aspect of “scientism” pursuant to Jesuit theory or claim.
Praveen Mohan has an exceptional video showing a recreated “Dendera Lightbulb” which shows an inner snake-like / circular plasma. Also look into DAN WINTER and also ERIC DOLLARD, particularly Dollard’s description of a plasmic ‘cosmos’ appearing in an unique Farnsworth tube. John G Trump was pivotal to high-energy physics research, weaponization.
Electron spin is a mathematical artifact and not something that has ever been physically observed. Spin 1/2 is an idea that acts like a narrative frame that filters perceptions to confirm predetermined, university-indoctrinated bias. Modern science is as much a religion as Catholicism.
Excellent comment:
23 years teaching high school physics and chemistry, and this is the first framework I have seen that does what I ask students to do every day: define your terms, name your bodies, and show me the motion. So I wrote up a Claim-Evidence-Reasoning summary of Material Atomics to check whether I have actually understood it.
CLAIM
All physical phenomena, matter and electrodynamics and gravitation and radiation, arise from the displacement of continuous extended material bodies in contact. The fundamental constituent is the fiber, an elastic subunit composing the continuous toroidal horn-vortex atom, its dense central nuclear bottleneck, and the radiating filaments that form a structured ether. The electron is not an object the atom contains; it is the patterned rotational circulation of the outer shell. Charge is the overdriven or underdriven speed of that circulation relative to what the nuclear bottleneck can pass.
EVIDENCE
- Cathode rays. Plücker and Hittorf (1857): a plate cathode gives diffuse wall glow; a point cathode gives a focused thread they described as flexible chains of iron filings. Thomson (1897) measured m/e ≈ 1.2 × 10⁻⁷ grams per abcoulomb. Under extreme vacuum, a cold tube stops conducting entirely, and restoring it takes thermionic emission, which visibly eats away the emitting surface.
- Vacuum is never void. Plücker’s Geissler tube at 10⁻³ atmospheres still held about 10¹⁹ atoms per liter. Even the strongest modern vacuums hold about 10⁵ atoms per liter. A pencil-width column drawn from here to the Sun contains quadrillions of atoms available to pass motion along.
- Quantitative electrodynamics. Millikan’s integer charge steps, e ≈ 1.602 × 10⁻¹⁹ C. Faraday’s electrolysis stoichiometry, which Stoney used to compute the unit of electrical action and name it. Ørsted and Ampère on orthogonal deflection. And the standing puzzle: signal speed near c while copper drift velocity sits near 10⁻⁴ m/s.
- Waves and optics. Chladni (1787) produced nodal geometries analogous to s, p, d, and f profiles from continuous mechanics alone. A 45° polarizer between crossed filters restores 12.5% transmission. Davisson-Germer scattered into de Broglie peaks. Planck’s law avoids the ultraviolet catastrophe by exponential suppression rather than a cutoff.
- Benchmarks any model has to clear. Michelson-Morley measured under 0.01 fringe against a predicted 0.4. Bell tests reach S = 2√2 ≈ 2.828 against a classical bound of 2.
REASONING
- Ontology and interlocked push. Bodies exist; real abstractions (time, speed, energy balances) occur, and they supervene on bodies in motion. Tension is never a pull across a void; it is the interlocked push of hooked fibers against each other’s inner surfaces.
- Horn torus and spin -1/2. The 2:1 path, two lateral rotations per involution, lets the atom carry spin -1/2 at subluminal surface speed across the Bohr radius. As circulation accelerates and the bottleneck caps throughput, the shell deforms into higher harmonic lobes to lengthen the surface path and hold the period.
- Source and sink, and torsional conduction. Overdriven atoms are kinetic sources and underdriven ones sinks, so opposites mesh and transfer motion while like pairs clash. Potential torques conductor shells like interlocked gears, carrying the pulse at v = √(T/μ), the way tightening a guitar string raises wave speed without sending its atoms down the neck.
- Magnetism as the orthogonal motion. Longitudinal flow through the bottleneck is the current; equatorial rotation drags filaments into twisted coaxial cords. That gives the right-hand rule directly, and ∇·B = 0 states that those loops are closed.
- Reach without magic. Starlight is a transverse torsional packet at c = √(T/μ) across the mesh; gravity is the static inward tension held on the same strands; entanglement is stress along a filament path established at a shared origin. Had biology posited a “genetic field” directing protein synthesis from across space instead of finding DNA, genetics would have stalled exactly as physics did.
Two things I have questions on:
First, the Crookes paddle wheel looks reclaimable for your side: Thomson discounted it himself in 1903 at roughly 2 × 10⁻³ dyn, far too small to turn the vanes, crediting the radiometric effect, which needs the gas to be there. It is still taught as proof of electron momentum.
Second, the case I keep snagging on. A cold field-emission gun draws a working beam at ultra-high vacuum from an unheated tip, with no thermionic heating and no evaporated vapor bridge. How does the chain get established there?
Mainstream physics already agrees that “particles are localized excitations of an underlying field,” not separate objects placed into an empty stage. Alfred Parson’s 1915 “magnetic electron” proposed a toroidal model of the electron, but Dirac and Landé showed that a point particle can carry intrinsic quantum spin and a magnetic moment without needing any classical spinning substructure at all. QED constrain the electron to being point-like down to about 10⁻²⁰ meters, with no detected substructure of any kind. A field like a magnetic field, or even a propagating EM wave, is just a boundary condition, a region where an excited state exists, but is not differentiated from the background until it interacts with something, it is potentiality. “Shadow is ever besieged, for that is its nature. Whilst darkness devours, and light steals. And so one sees shadow ever retreat to hidden places.” — Steven Erikson
The ‘donut/toroid’ hypothesis at 21:00 supports the idea that ‘sub-quantum particles’ [matter] are ‘standing waves’ of photons/charges[?] which implies that two waves of same character are translocating/moving in opposite directions. Depending on the wave/frequency of the captive wave[s], the number of whole waves/nodes could be any whole integer 1, 2, 3,… [the wave number, defined as number of wavelengths per unit distance: where λ is the wavelength; also defined as the spatial frequency]. For atoms, the standing wave is not reflecting of surfaces but is rather a wave/photon that is captured by the nucleus. It could be just one captured wave/photon/charge but being confined in such a small space it could potentially double back on itself fast enough to have the effect of two waves traveling in opposite directions. This could be enabled by superposition, giving rise to the idea that the central node ‘moves through’ the nucleus BECAUSE IT has zero energy/charge at that location [think lemniscate/infinity symbol geometry for wave number #2]. The following vid is the standard egg-splanation of how EM waves/radiation are created. Since the captured wave [electron, etc] is ‘orbiting’ the nucleus it produces a concentrated boundary layer of electric field that is normally experienced as EM radiation but, IMHO, when bound to a ‘nucleus’ it does not radiate and has the properties we call matter/solid/surface/substance. That boundary layer radiates only when excited by sufficient energy. Vid: ‘EM Waves: Production and Propagation | EM waves | Physics | Khan Academy’ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1OUW4nbrZgc
It’s too bad that you don’t know anything about the R3 spin group. A rotation expressed as axis angle rotated by another rotation takes 720° to get the original spin vector back to its original position. 360 degrees there’s a positionally identical spin but it has a different angular velocity potentially. And it’s really something that the math just does for spinning objects… Which means the orientation of a electron is better described by a rotation vector then a orientation…. When you get lost in imaginary quaternions you lose the entire structure and it becomes in obvious what is actually happening… But there is another math system that nobody uses that could be used and is pretty intuitive once you get used to it. Google gives me my paper on ‘r3 spin group’ (rotation vectors in 3 dimensions) as like the third link today. Instead of staying in that group… It’s always projected to quaternions which loses the underlying geometry. Well our three vectors are actually kind of a natural coordinate systen.