Thursday, November 4, 2010

Bonded Seraphim, Part I

Part I, Part II

Abstract

In The Cherubim Model of Elementary Particles series, I wrote that, according to my interpretation of Ezekiel's metaphorical writings, the electron is a composite particle that consists of four elementary particles called cherubim. Every cherub carries 1/4 of the charge and 1/4 of the mass of the electron. To my surprise, I discovered the existence of experimental evidence that strongly corroborates the Cherubim model. Additionally, the motion of a cherub is restricted to an absolute two-dimensional plane. It follows that the motion of an electron is likewise restricted. I then introduced the concept of cherubim bonding in order to explain the observed unrestricted motion of electrons in normal 3D space.

The Cherubim Model stands in sharp contrast to the Standard Model or even the Rishon Particle Model. The former postulates that the electron is an elementary particle (that is to say, |e| is the elementary charge) while the latter posits that the electron is composed of three elementary particles called rishons, each having 1/3 of the charge of the electron. In this multi-part article, I would like to change the focus a little by revisiting the dynamics of seraphim (see: The Lattice Hypothesis for more info on seraphim). In light of what I previously described concerning the motion of cherubim, I now believe that some form of bonding is needed to explain seraphim motion as well. Please read the previous articles before continuing.

Seraphim Motion Revisited

Early on, I assumed that the motion of seraphim (the burning ones) had a straight forward explanation. I reasoned that, since every seraph had six wings with which to move (two for each of the three spatial dimensions), it had no trouble moving in any of the six directions of normal 3-D space.
I held on to that assumption for a long time even though I knew from reading Isaiah 6:2 (see below) that seraphim could only use two wings for motion. I argued that seraphim likely had the ability to switch from one pair of wings to another on the fly. It turns out that I was mistaken.

In truth, I was never quite satisfied with my original explanation. For one, the ancient texts make no mention of any sort of sustained back and forth wing swapping during seraphic motion. Second, it occurred to me that saying that a seraph could swap wings on the fly was really no different than saying that it could use three wings. The problem is that Isaiah insisted that every seraph uses only two wings for motion. Obviously, something had to give. Not too long ago, I came to realize that, even though my wing hypothesis was basically sound, my understanding of the mechanism of seraphim motion had to be revised.

The Curious Wings of the Seraphim

I have learned the hard way that anyone who attempts to interpret the ancient metaphorical texts would do well to pay close attention to the little details, regardless of how unimportant they may appear. For example, consider the following verse from the book of Isaiah.
Isaiah 6:2
Above it stood seraphim; each one had six wings: with two he covered his face, with two he covered his feet, and with two he flew.
The fact that the seraphim are standing tells us not only that they have feet but also that they are not always moving. This makes sense because, according to the lattice hypothesis, every seraph is initially at absolute rest in the lattice. Indeed, one of the foundational principles of the hypothesis is that the motion of a particle can only be sustained via interactions with other particles. Knowing that every seraph has six wings and a single face, we can infer that the seraphim are identical to the living creatures mentioned in the book of Revelation. What is strange is that every seraph uses only two wings for movement. It is strange because, as I indicated previously, it restricts the seraph's motion to a two-dimensional plane. This is unacceptable because light, which consists of moving seraphim, is observed to move in any arbitrary direction.

Upcoming

It turns out that, as with cherubim, seraphim motion can be explained via something I have been calling la mano de Dios. What is even more intriguing is that each seraph are said to have two wings covering its feet and two wings covering its face. What could this possibly mean? I will explain these enigmas in Part II. Coming soon.

Sunday, October 24, 2010

The Cherubim Model of Elementary Particles, Part VI

Part I, II, III, IV, V, VI

Abstract

Sorry for the delay. In Part V, I wrote that electrons use a special cherubic property (hands) to attach themselves to other electrons and form locked pairs. In today's post, I describe the mechanics of hand grabbing and I explain how pairing solves the electron motion problem that I spoke of in Part III. But first, I would like to say a few words about the three types of electrons that I hinted at in a previous post. Please read the previous installments before continuing.

Three Types of Electrons

The Cherubim model predicts the existence of three types of electrons. Why? Remember that every cherub has two pairs of wings, one pair per dimension. This restricts the cherub's motion to only two dimensions, which is the same as saying that it can only move in an absolute 2-D plane. However, Ezekiel's text does not specify which two dimensions the wings of a cherub belong to. This implies that they can belong to any two of the three spatial dimensions.
Note: A dimension, within the context of these posts, is defined as an absolute degree of freedom, i.e., a line of motion parallel to one of the four absolute axes of the universe.
If we label the three spatial dimensions A, B, and C, it is easy to see that there can only be three possible combination pairs: AB, AC, and BC. These are the three types of cherubim. Since electrons consist of identical cherubim, it follows that there are also three types of electrons. What does it all mean? It means that, in spite of their identical electric charge, electrons have three possible magnetic signatures. Why? Because it is the wings of cherubim that generate their magnetic fields during motion.

As far as I can tell from studying the ancient texts, cherubim and electrons do not change from one type to another. At this point in my research, I can only guess that all three types are equally distributed in matter. But it's only a guess. I am sure there are experiments one can perform to determine the precise type of an electron but I haven't given it much thought. Suffice it to say that knowing the precise direction of the absolute axes of the universe will be an essential part of the experiments. I'll get back to this in a future article.

Hand Grabbing Rules

The following may seem somewhat complicated but, if you can play tic-tac-toe, you'll have no trouble grasping it. There are no complex math equations to decipher, just a few simple principles. Please keep the following verse from the book of Ezekiel in the back of your mind for reference.
Ezekiel 1:8.Under their wings on their four sides they had the hands of a man.
Let's consider an electron of type AB. Every cherub that comprises the electron has four wings, two for dimension A and two for dimension B. The wings can be labelled thus: A1, A2, B1 and B2. Since the hands of a cherub are under their wings, we can use the same labels for them as well. According to my evolving Cherubim particle model, there are several rules that govern the way cherubim can use their hands to hold on to one another.
  1. A cherub's hand can grab the hand of another cherub only if both hands are on the same side. For example, an A1 hand can only grab another A1 hand.
  2. One cherub can only hold one of the hands of another. The reason is that, even though the hands are on four sides of the cherub, all the hands are human hands. Using more than one hand to grab another cherub would be redundant.
  3. In any given electron, if two hands are attached to each other on a side, the other two hands must also be attached. This is because all the hands on a given side are under (governed by) the same touching wings.
These rules are necessary in order to understand what follows.

Las Cuatro Manos de Dios

Given the above, it should be obvious that, regardless of type, there are four ways that one cherub can hold on to another. The figure below shows the four cherubim that comprise an electron of type AB. The cherubim are arranged vertically, each with four hands, A1, A2, B1 and B2. The brackets indicate which pair of hands are joined together. As you can see, the four hands on the B2 side are free. I call them las cuatro manos de Dios (the four hands of God) mostly for fun but also because I know it will be a source of irritation to atheists everywhere when the cat gets out of the bag. Let me just say that irritating atheists is one of my hobbies.
We can call this AB electron, AB2, to indicate that it has free hands on side B2. Using this simple convention, an AB electron with free hands on side A1 would be called A1B. Likewise, a BC electron with free hands on side B2 would be called B2C.

At this point I am not sure what causes an electron to have four free hands on any given side. I suspect that this is something that is determined when two compatible electrons get together and form a bonded pair.

Electron Pairing

What is really interesting about all this is that two electrons can latch on to each other as long as they have identical free hands. For example, an AB2 electron has the ability to hold on to a B2C electron and form a bonded pair called AB2C. Likewise, an AC1 electron can bond to a BC1 electron to form an ABC1 pair.

Two questions comes to my mind. First, can an AB2 electron bond with another AB2 electron? Second, since every electron has an can an electron bond with a fifth cherub? The answer to the first question is yes but the motion of the bonded pair will be restricted to the absolute plane AB. The answer to the second question is also yes but the bond will be a rather weak one. Why? Because, according to the grabbing rules, the fifth cherub can only use one hand for grabbing. I'll leave it as an exercise to the reader to figure out why.

Electron Pairing and Electron Motion

Electron pairing is good news because the Cherubim particle model imposes a severe restriction on the motion of solitary electrons. As explained elsewhere, a single electron can only move in an absolute plane, the axes of which are aligned with two of the three absolute dimensions of space. However, a bonded electron pair has an additional degree of freedom that allows it to move in three dimensions. I can make a simple prediction, based on this model. I predict that a directed electron beam (say, in a cathode ray tube) consists exclusively of bonded electron pairs. Let me add that there is a little bit more to the mechanics of electron pairing as it applies to motion than what I have covered in this post. I will have more to say about the subject in a future article.

Upcoming

Note that I am aware of electron pairing in the physics literature but the definitions used in the Standard Model do not correspond to the Cherubim model. Indeed, the two models are so different that it is often hard to make direct comparisons. Thanks to Einstein and his cheerleaders, the very concept of absolute dimensions, a prerequisite in the Cherubim model, is anathema to the physics community.

So far, I am following a certain logic based on a set of assumptions to arrive at my interpretations and conclusions. From my perspective, I think there is a slight chance that I may be wrong about some of the details. This is why this is only a hypothesis for the time being. Unfortunately, I don't have adequate resources to experimentally validate the model. Not yet, anyway. I am preparing a series on protons and neutrons that, hopefully, will change all that. In my next article, I will revisit seraphim motion and talk about something that I figured out only recently: seraphim bonding.

Thursday, October 14, 2010

Temporary Pause

I apologize for the delay in posting the next installment in the Cherubim series. I don't know why but it seems that whenever I get close to some breakthrough in my research, some bad thing happens that demands my full attention elsewhere. So please, hang in there. There are many more exciting revelations I want to talk about. This stuff promises to be more disruptive and game changing than even I can imagine.

Tuesday, October 12, 2010

The Cherubim Model of Elementary Particles, Part V

Part I, II, III, IV, V, VI

Abstract

According to the Cherubim particle model, the elementary particles that comprise every electron carry 1/4 of the electron's charge and can only move in an absolute 2-D plane. This limitation is at odds with experimental observations. In this post, I will describe the strange and fascinating properties of electrons, as predicted by the model.

La Mano de Dios

During the 1986 World Cup quarter finals, the famous Argentinian striker, Diego Maradona, scored a winning goal against the English team with a handball.
Source: Bob Thomas Sports Photography, Getty Images, taken 22 June 1986

Unbelievably, the goal was allowed by the referee even though it was illegal. Argentina went on to win the World Cup with a final win against West Germany. This incident quickly became known as the Hand of God goal (la Mano de Dios) in fĂștbol circles. So, what does this have to do with Ezekiel, electrons and cherubim? Let me first say that I'm having a little fun here because I happen to like soccer as a sport. Second, recall that a hand in Ezekiel's vision is a symbol that stands for a special property that allows one cherub to grab or hold on to another. I realize that I am mixing my metaphors but the point I want to make is that sometimes, with a helping hand, awesome things can be achieved that would be impossible otherwise.

Human Hands Under their Wings

One of the problems with having a composite electron is that its constituents have the same charge polarity and, as a result, they repel each other. It is for this reason that cherubim, the charged elementary constituents of the electron, must have a special property that holds them together and prevents them from flying apart. This property is symbolized in Ezekiel's text by the hands.
Ezekiel 1:8.Under their wings on their four sides they had the hands of a man. All four of them had faces and wings.
It makes sense to conclude from this verse that, since every cherub has four wings, it must also have four hands. However, why does the verse mention only four sides? Given that a cherub has four faces, shouldn't we expect it to have eight sides in total, one for each direction? Yes, of course. However, I don't think that Ezekiel was referring to facial orientations. I think he was referring to a different kind of sides. I think he was talking about the four possible directions of motion of a cherub. The four sides are really associated with the four wings of the cherub, that is to say, its four possible directions of travel.

That being said, why must every cherub have four hands? After all, each cherub only needs to hold on to three other cherubim. Having four hands means that every cherub has one extra free hand. I call this free hand, la mano de Dios not just because it reminds me of Diego Maradona's famous handball but because this is what explains the observed motion of electrons.

The Four Free Hands of the Electron

Since an electron is composed of four cherubim, it follows that every electron has four free hands. The question is, what are those hands for? In my opinion, they are used for grabbing another electron. At this point, I think you can probably guess where I am going with this. According to the Cherubim model, which I derived from the ancient Biblical metaphors, electrons do not move alone. They travel in pairs.

The Road Ahead

The main purpose of a particle model is to explain why particles come in certain configurations and properties. The second purpose is to predict the existence of heretofore undiscovered configurations and properties. If I am right, we will eventually be able to use the Cherubim model to explain the mass and composition of not just protons and neutrons but the mass number of the various nuclei as well. And we should be able to do this starting from the mass of the electron. This is the road ahead and I will follow it wherever it leads.

Upcoming

I truly believe in the old Christian adage, search and you will find. Who knows what delightful surprises await us around every corner? In Part VI, I will describe electron pairing in more detail and explain why pairing is an essential aspect of electron movement and overall behavior. I will also explain why there are three types of electrons. I know, I had promised to do this in this post but I think it's best that I leave it for the next one.

Saturday, October 9, 2010

The Cherubim Model of Elementary Particles, Part IV

Part I, II, III, IV, V, VI

Abstract

To repeat, the Cherubim particle model posits the existence of elementary particles called cherubim, each of which carries exactly 1/4 of the electron's charge and mass. Thus, according to the model, an electron is composed of four identical cherubim. In Part III, I wrote that I had reasons to doubt the correctness of my wing hypothesis. I explained that my interpretation of the wing metaphor does not explain the motion of cherubim (and of electrons) since a cherub has only two pairs of wings. Alright, I have a confession to make. It is true that I have had reasons to ask myself in the past, "what if my wing hypothesis is complete crap? What then?" However, I have since resolved those questions and, at this time, I no longer have any reason to abandon it. I just wanted to give my readers a feel for the kind of thought processes that have gone through and continue to go through my mind as I meditate about the physical meaning of the various metaphors. In today's post, I will continue to reveal more of my reasoning. My goal is to guide my readers through my thought processes in order to show how and why I arrived at the conclusions that I did. Please read the previous installments if you have not already done so.

Wings and Feet

There is no question that the wings of seraphim and cherubim are associated with motion in the three absolute spatial dimensions. After all, since the universe is both discrete and absolute, motion can only take place on a fixed 4-D discrete grid, in a manner of speaking. As I have written elsewhere, the motion of matter in the fourth dimension is handled by a specific particle property, which is symbolized by the feet in Ezekiel's and Isaiah's text. Therefore, only the wings are left to handle ordinary motion in 3-D space. I reasoned that, since every dimension has two opposite directions, if follows that it takes two wings to move in any given dimension, a positive and a negative wing. It follows that any particle must have a total of six wings in order to move in 3-D space in any arbitrary direction.

Mysterious Wings

A cherub can only move in an absolute plane, just like a seraph. However, unlike a seraph, a cherub only has two pairs of wings. This "forever" confines its movements to a single absolute plane. Here's what Ezekiel wrote about the wings of the cherubim according to one translation:
Ezekiel 1:11. Their wings were spread out upward; each had two wings, one touching the wing of another creature on either side, and two wings covering its body.
This is a rather strange verse and if you take a look at the interlinear translation of the Hebrew text (pdf), it gets even stranger. However, once you analyse it in the light of the wing hypothesis, it's not so hard to understand. First, if two wings of a creature are covering its body (the wing down position), we can conclude that they cannot contribute to its motion in that position. So, that leaves only two wings for motion, the two that are stretched upward. This makes sense because, according to the wing hypothesis, motion in any given dimension in the lattice requires two wings, one for each direction. But obviously, since a particle cannot go in both directions at a time, only one wing (positive or negative) can be deployed at a time for that dimension, depending on the direction of motion.

With only two wings for motion, a cherub can only move in a 2-D plane. A strange limitation but it gets stranger still. Notice that the two wings that are deployed and used for motion also touch the wings of another creature. What does this tell us? It tells us two things. First, keeping in mind that all four cherubim move in unison, we can conclude that all four have identical pairs of wings that are deployed identically. Second, it follows that the translation of verse 11 above cannot be correct. After studying the interlinear translation (please do so yourself), I arrived at the following much more plausible translation:
Ezekiel 1:11. Two wings of every creature were spread out upward and touched the wings of every other creature. The other two wings covered its body.
Note that the only way for two wings to touch each other is for them to share the same dimension. The touching metaphor is almost certainly a way of saying that the wings are identical. The picture that comes to my mind is that every creature (cherub) within a group of four uses a pair of identical wings when moving, while lowering the other pair of identical wings. The effect is not unlike that of a perfectly synchronized ballet. I think we should be careful about how we translate the Hebrew word for 'each'. Apparently, there is only one Hebrew word for both 'each' and 'every'. It's kind of like the French word 'chaque', which means either 'each' or 'every', depending on the context. This can create much confusion in trying to understand Ezekiel's vision but the cool thing is that other passages in the same chapter contribute to an overall contextual understanding.

Upcoming

As I explained previously, since we observe electrons to move in any arbitrary spatial direction, there has to be a way to explain their motion in spite of their 2-D wing limitation. In my next post I will reveal why I think that my wing hypothesis is still viable even though it does not explain--all by itself, that is--the motion of electrons. We need something else, something that I call la mano de Dios. I will also take the opportunity to explain why there must be three types of electrons and what this has to do with their motion. Stay tuned.

Sunday, October 3, 2010

The Cherubim Model of Elementary Particles, Part III

Part I, II, III, IV, V, VI

Abstract

To recap, the Cherubim model posits that an electron is a composite particle. Each of its four elementary constituents (cherubim) carries 1/4 of the electron's charge and mass. In addition, the model calls for the mass energy of a cherub to be associated with one of the three absolute spatial dimensions. I had planned to explain in this post why the electron is composed of four sub-particles and not 2, 3, 5 or more. I decided instead to leave that for an upcoming post. In this post, I would like to talk about a problem that has been bothering me for some time: there is something about my current wing hypothesis that does not fly. But first, allow me to bring your attention to an obscure but relevant branch of physics known as the Fractional Quantum Hall Effect.

The Quarter Electron

I remember reading years ago about a peculiar phenomenon in experimental physics called the Fractional Quantum Hall Effect. It seems that, when electrons are confined to a two-dimensional plane, fractional charges are detected. A few days ago, in light of the developing Cherubim particle model which calls for the existence of particles with 1/4 of the electron's charge, I decided to do a search on the web to find out what's been happening in the field. To my surprise, I came across several published papers that mention the finding of 1/4 electric charges. The following excerpt from an April 2008 Nature article (paid subscription is required to access the full article), in particular, caught my attention:
Debut of the quarter electron

Eduardo Fradkin

A particle-like object with a quarter of an electron's charge is the latest find in a hotbed of quantum-physical experimentation, the fractional quantum Hall fluid. Its significance is more than esoteric.

On page 829 of this issue, Dolev et al.1 report the detection of vortices in a fluid of electrons confined to two dimensions within a semiconductor structure that carry just 1/4 of the electron's charge. These 'quasiparticles' are an exciting find: according to theoretical predictions, their collective behaviour should be described by an unusual type of particle statistics known as non-abelian statistics.
Needless to say, I find the whole thing fascinating. I mean, this seems to be a rather strong confirmation of the Cherubim Model, doesn't it? I think it is. Certainly, I disagree with the author's use of the term 'quasiparticles', although I understand why he chose to use it. According to the Standard Model (the one that is accepted by all mainstream physicists), the electron is an elementary or non-composite point particle and the electric charge is the elementary charge. So the author cannot be seen as directly contradicting the accepted model. Physicists are not a very gutsy bunch, that's for sure.

One of the things that piqued my interest is the fact that the fractional Hall effect is observed only if the electrons in question are confined to a very thin two-dimensional plane or layer. It is interesting because, according to the Cherubim Model, a cherub can only move in a 2-D plane. I'll explain what I mean by this in my next post.

The Problem with my Wing Hypothesis

The four absolute dimensions of the universe are symbolized in the ancient texts by the lion, man, bull and eagle metaphors. I have always assumed that every intrinsic particle property must be directly associated with one or more of the four dimensions. For examples, faces, bodies and feet are explicitly described in the ancient texts as having a dimensional nature. The only exception seems to be the wings. Nowhere in the texts are the wings directly associated with any of the four dimensions. In other words, there is no mention of either a bull or lion wing. Certainly, an eagle or a bull faced seraph (lattice particle) can have wings but nowhere do the texts imply that a wing is limited to motion in any particular dimension. This is very strange because the wording of the metaphors is very precise. At first, I ignored the apparent incongruity but I recently had to face it head on, so to speak. Here is the problem:
I assumed that, even though a seraph can only use one pair of wings at a time for motion, by switching from one pair to another on the fly, it could move in any 3-D direction because it has three pairs of wings in total to play with.
Isaiah 6:2
Above it stood seraphim; each one had six wings: with two he covered his face, with two he covered his feet, and with two he flew.
I guessed that this meant that there were three positive and three negative wings or one pair for each dimension or direction. This seemed fine as far as seraphim were concerned but what about cherubim? These creatures are described in the book of Ezekiel as having only two pairs of wings! Since we observe that electrons (which consist of cherubim) can move in any spatial direction, this would imply that cherubim must have six wings as well. Ezekiel disagreed. At this point, I can only conclude that my old wing hypothesis no longer has a leg to stand on. This is distressing.

Upcoming

There is no question that my current wing hypothesis must be revised or replaced entirely. This is the subject of my next post in this series.

Wednesday, September 29, 2010

The Cherubim Model of Elementary Particles, Part II

Part I, II, III, IV, V, VI

Abstract

In Part I, I introduced the Cherubim Model of elementary particles by positing that the electron consists of four identical particles (cherubim) each having 1/4 of the mass and 1/4 of the charge of the electron. The inspiration for the model comes primarily from Ezekiel's strange symbolic vision of four living creatures or cherubim. In my current interpretation of the vision, the four-faced, four-winged cherubim are elementary particles, the primary constituents of all matter. In this post, I would like to explain why I insist that the four cherubim of the book of Ezekiel represent an electron and not some other particle. I also would like to make a prediction derived from the observation that the cherubim are described as having human form and human hands.

Why the Electron?

When physicists talk about the atom, they usually paint a picture of a massive nucleus of protons and neutrons surrounded by a cloud of orbiting electrons. The way I see it, the electrons do not orbit the nucleus at all but interact with it by going right through it. When an electron collides with the nucleus, it is quickly ejected by the interaction and travels a certain distance away before falling right back into it. It ensues that there is a constant and rapid back and forth movement of electrons through the nucleus. This rapid alternating motion has a certain frequency and this is what generates the electromagnetic signature of the atom. So what does this have to do with Ezekiel? What caused me to suspect that Ezekiel's vision of the four cherubim was a symbolic description of the electron? The answer can be found in Ezekiel 1:13-14:
The appearance of the living creatures was like burning coals of fire or like torches. Fire moved back and forth among the creatures; it was bright, and lightning flashed out of it. The creatures sped back and forth like flashes of lightning.
I interpret the fire metaphor to represent the energy of the particles. The symbolism strongly alludes to the rapid back and forth motion of electrons within an atom and the movement of lattice particles (seraphim or burning ones) between the various particles.

Absolute Dimensions and Particle Beam Accelerators: A Prediction

Remember that the four dimensions of the universe are symbolized by four directions or faces: bull, eagle, man and lion. In my opinion, 'human form' and 'human hands' are a way of saying that the mass and grabbing properties of the particles are only associated with a specific absolute dimension. It is for this reason that I believe that particle accelerators should show results that are strongly affected by the absolute orientation of the particle beams. Since I previously identified the bull face as the fourth dimension, the 'human' dimension is therefore one of the three absolute "spatial' dimensions. By absolute dimension, I mean an unchanging direction relative to the fixed stars, using normal physics parlance. I predict that by aligning the particle beams in a direction parallel to the 'human' dimension, physicists will observe a sudden and profound change in the type and quantity of the particles emitted from the collisions.

The only problem is to determine which direction the 'human' dimension is facing. At this point, my advice is this: experimenters should try as many directions as possible until they notice a significant change in their results. Of course, this is not as easy as it sounds since particle accelerators tend to be huge installations. However, the absolute direction of the particle beams changes constantly as the earth rotates on its axis and orbits the sun. Experimenters might get lucky.

Upcoming

One of the questions that have been percolating in my mind is this: why four cherubim? I mean, why not three, or five, or more? That's the topic of my next post.

Sunday, September 26, 2010

The Cherubim Model of Elementary Particles, Part I

Part I, II, III, IV, V, VI

Abstract

The Rishon Particle Model posits that all matter consists of elementary particles called rishons. There are two types of rishons, T and V, which are named after the Hebrew words tohu (unformed) and vohu (void). These two words are translated as "without form and void" in the second verse of the book of Genesis. A V rishon is electrically neutral whereas a T rishon has a positive or negative electric charge equal in magnitude to 1/3 of the charge of the electron. The Rishon Model contradicts the Standard Model in that it calls for the electron to be a composite particle that consists of three T rishons. In the Standard Model, by contrast, the electron is an elementary particle and the charge of the electron is considered elementary. In this new series, I will present a different view of the electron based on a new tentative particle model derived from my work on the lattice hypothesis. In this model, the electron is indeed a composite particle but it is composed of, not three, but four elementary particles. Those of you who have already read the Lattice Interactions series probably know where I am going with this. If you have not already done so, please read the previous articles before continuing.

The Spirit of the Cherubim
Ezekiel 1:19-21. When the living creatures moved, the wheels beside them moved; and when the living creatures rose from the ground, the wheels also rose. Wherever the spirit would go, they would go, and the wheels would rise along with them, because the spirit of the living creatures was in the wheels. When the creatures moved, they also moved; when the creatures stood still, they also stood still; and when the creatures rose from the ground, the wheels rose along with them, because the spirit of the living creatures was in the wheels.
I added the italics in the passage above to make a point. The point is that, even though Ezekiel was describing four cherubim (or living creatures), they all shared a single spirit. The cherubim and their wheels all move in unison, as if they were a single entity controlled by a single principle or spirit. I interpret this symbolism to mean that the four cherubim are identical elementary constituents of a single composite particle. Note that the word elementary does not imply that an elementary particle is necessarily a constituent of every type of composite particle. It simply means non-composite.

Let me come right out and say that I believe that the four cherubim of Ezekiel represent an electron and that the electron is a composite particle. Furthermore, I believe that each of the four constituents of the electron has fractional charge and mass that are equal to exactly 1/4 of those of the electron. This is in sharp contradiction to both the Rishon and the Standard models. I will have more to say about this in my next post.

The Mass Problem

In the previous series, I argued for the existence of elementary mass. To recap, my argument is that, since the lattice hypothesis calls for every particle to be moving at the speed of light in the fourth dimension, it must interact with lattice particles of equal mass/energy. Since interactions in the fourth dimension are responsible for the electric field of a particle, this means that the strength of the electric field must be proportional to the total mass/energy of the particle. The problem is that all charged particles are observed to have equal charge regardless of the magnitude of their mass/energy. At the time, I was under the impression that the charge of the electron was elementary. So I concluded that the mass of the electron had to be the elementary mass and that massive particles like the proton must consist of a number of elementary components with the same mass as the electron.

I have since changed my mind and, based on my new interpretation of the cherubim, I now believe that there is an elementary particle (the cherub, if you will) with precisely 1/4 the charge and mass of the electron. I think that all normal matter particles consists of cherubim in various combinations. I also have reasons to suppose that there is a second type of cherubim, a neutral elementary particle that serves as a "glue" particle for more massive particles like the proton and the neutron. So, in a way, the Cherubim model is somewhat similar to the Rishon Model but with different elementary charge magnitudes.

Upcoming

In Part II, I will explain why I now believe that Ezekiel's four living creatures symbolize an electron. I will also have something to say about particle accelerators and particle beam orientation.

Thursday, September 16, 2010

Lattice Interactions, Part IX

Part I, II, III, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII, IX

Abstract

According to the lattice hypothesis, the electric field that surrounds a charged particle such as an electron is generated by its interactions with the particles (seraphim) that comprise the lattice as the electron travels in the fourth dimension at the speed of light. A constant stream of seraphim are jettisoned away from the points of interaction and these constitute the electric field of the particle. The question is, knowing that there are not nearly enough radiating seraphim to fill the entire area around the electron, why is the field detectable everywhere in that space? This is the topic of today's post.

Wheels Within Wheels

Ezekiel repeatedly mentioned that the wheels that he saw in his vision had the appearance of a wheel within a wheel. That is a rather strange metaphor because it is not everyday that we encounter a wheel within a wheel. One is left to wonder, was it a wheel intersecting another wheel at right angle? Or was it a smaller wheel neatly lodged inside a bigger one? Ezekiel did not see fit to provide the details. In his day, wheels were made of wood reinforced with either iron, copper or bronze.


The basic design has not changed much over the years. It consists of a center hub surrounded by a number of spokes attached to a circular rim, not unlike a bicycle wheel. Ezekiel did not say anything about the spokes of the wheels but he did mention that they had enormous and awesome rims. I interpret the wheel to symbolize the electric field that surrounds a charged particle because, like gravity, an electric field extends out indefinitely. What is really interesting, from my perspective, is that the wheel is at rest (i.e., on the ground) when the creatures (particles) are also at rest. This is perfectly analogous to the electric field of an electron. What I mean is that, unlike the magnetic field, the electric field does not collapse when the electron is at rest. This is one of the reasons that it is called the electrostatic field.
Another thing to note is that there are only four wheels, one for each of the four-faced creatures. This means that, even though each creature has four faces, it has only one wheel. This is consistent with the lattice hypothesis in that only one of the four faces (dimensions) is associated with the electric field: the ox or bull face. The other three faces are responsible for the magnetic field.

On a different tangent, notice that there are four electric fields superimposed on one another. At this point, the symbolism seems almost inescapable. The wheels within wheels metaphor might be a way of saying that the electric fields of the four particles are superimposed on each other so as to form a single composite particle. But then again, it might have to do with something else altogether, as I explain below.

Full of Eyes All Around
Ezekiel 1:28. Their rims were high and awesome, and all four rims were full of eyes all around.
Important Note: It seems that the ancient Hebrew language did not have a specific word for sphere. Equally important to this discussion is the realization that the Hebrew word for rim can also be translated as back or surface.

We already encountered the eye metaphor in connection with the four living creatures of the book of Revelation:
Revelation 1:7. In the center, around the throne, were four living creatures, and they were covered with eyes, in front and in back. The first living creature was like a lion, the second was like an ox, the third had a face like a man, the fourth was like a flying eagle.
These are the seraphim that comprise the lattice. They, like the rims of Ezekiel's wheels, are also full of eyes. The eyes are yet another indication that the wheels are closely associated with seraphim. The only difference is that the eyes on Ezekiel's wheels form a rim or circle. But what does it mean for the rims to be full of eyes all around? I think it is a metaphor for the ability of a particle to sense phenomena at a distance. In other words, the rim full of eyes most likely signifies that the moving seraph's vision is restricted to a circle or sphere. It has to do with what quantum physicists call non-local interactions. This is the kind of stuff that Einstein would have called "spooky action at a distance". But how does it work?


In my opinion, it has to do with with the conservation of equilibrium. The diagram above shows two seraphim escaping from an electron. The arrows represent the directions of motion of the seraphim. The problem with this is that it creates a lopsided universe because, as the seraph moves away from the electron, the original neutral balance of energy is destroyed. Nature will have none of that because conservation laws are the basis of all phenomena. The only way, it seems, to maintain a proper balance is for nature to assume that the seraph's energy is spread thin all around the electron in a circle as if the particle was escaping from the electron in almost every direction at once. This is, of course, impossible. Nature must therefore opt for the next best thing, probability. So, in effect, there is a probabilistic interaction cloud of seraphim as these move away from the electron at the speed of light. The strength of the cloud follows an inverse square law (Coulomb's law) as the distance from the electron increase. This is because the average energy is spread as if it rested on the approximate surface of an expanding sphere.

Having said that, this does not mean, as physicists would have us believe, that a particle is somehow a wave that exists everywhere in the circle (or sphere) at the same time. It only means that, if a circle intersects another particle at a given point, nature decides instantly whether or not to move the seraph associated with the circle to the point of intersection and perform an interaction with the particle. I think this is what Ezekiel's rim metaphor is trying to convey: the moving seraph can be said to have eyes or sensors all around the rim, regardless of how far it is from the electron. It can instantly interact with another particle, in a non-local manner. It can do so because space (distance) does not exist. It is abstract, a perceptual illusion. The whole thing is pretty awesome but it's not spooky magic. Violations to conservation laws must all be corrected in the end. It's just nature doing its beautiful and awesome equilibrium thing.

Instantaneous Electric Field

One of the main differences between this hypothesis and the explanation of electric fields given in current physics texts is that the field moves with the charged particle. This is a must, otherwise the equilibrium is broken and nature will not allow it. As I explained previously, this is indicated in Ezekiel's text by the fact the wheel is said to move precisely in unison with the living creatures. In other words, the electric field is instantaneous. Of course, relativists and other Einstein defenders will insist that this is not true, that every change in the electric field of a particle propagates at the speed of light. Ezekiel's text says otherwise. I think this is a clear prediction that should not be too hard to test in the lab. Who, in the physics community (you know who you are) wants to be the next Nobel Prize winner?

Upcoming

So far, I have talked about what happens when moving matter particles collide with stationary seraphim in the lattice. In an upcoming series, I will explain what happens when moving seraphim collide with matter particles. Also, let me come out and say that I have reasons to believe that Ezekiel's four creatures represent a well-known particle of matter. I have an idea what that particle may be but I can't reveal it until I am 100% sure. One of the clues to the particle's identity is the fact that the creatures are said to move back and forth like lightning. It is all very interesting, if I may say so myself. Hang in there.

Sunday, September 12, 2010

Lattice Interactions, Part VIII

Part I, II, III, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII, IX

Abstract

Previously in this series, I argued that interactions between a normal matter particle, such as the electron, and the lattice depends on its direction of motion. That is to say, a matter particle will interact with a seraph (lattice particle) if it is moving in the same dimension as the seraph's face. In this post, I examine the properties and interactions that give rise to the electric field of an electron. Please read the previous installments before continuing.

Interactions and Speed

The foundational basis of the lattice hypothesis is causality. I have long maintained that I agree with Aristotle's view on causality which stipulates that no particle can move unless it is caused to move. As a result, we are immersed in an immense crystal-like ocean of particles that provide the causal energy necessary for motion. I have argued that the magnitude of a particle's motion depends on the energies involved in its interactions with lattice particles (seraphim). The rule that governs macroscopic speed is simple. A particle will move at the speed of light if the energy of every seraph it interacts with is equal to its own. Alternately, if the energy of the interacting seraphim is only half the particle's energy, then the particle will move at half the speed of light.

Note: By speed above, I am referring only to macroscopic speed. As I explained elsewhere, at the microscopic level, motion consists of a sequence of discrete jumps and wait periods. All jumps occur at light speed, which is the only microscopic speed possible.

In the motion hypothesis (see Physics: The Problem with Motion) that I've proposed, I claimed that a particle's energy is contained in its body and its wings (for those of you who are not yet aware of it, this is part of my evolving interpretation of a handful of ancient occult texts). A particle's speed depends on how much of its total energy is contained in its wings because only wings can interact with the seraphim in the lattice. Why? Because seraphim only have wings and wings interact only with other wings. A particle that is not moving (in 3-D space, that is) has all its energy in its body and none in its wings. It follows that the speed of a particle's motion in normal 3-D space is determined by how much of the particle's total energy is contained in its wings. It's all very simple really, because it is governed by simple arithmetic. One of these days, I'll put together an Adobe Flash animation that will bring it all together in a way that anybody can understand.

Have Feet, Will Travel

According to the lattice hypothesis, all matter particles in the observable universe and all moving seraphim are traveling in the fourth dimension at the speed of light. This requires that every particle has an additional energy property called feet. The problem is that simply having feet does not properly explain light speed travel in the fourth dimension. Why? Because light speed travel means that the entire energy of the particle is used for that purpose. Originally, I thought that this would leave nothing for normal 3-D motion. I struggled with this problem for a long time. I finally concluded that a) there is no rule that forbids a particle from interacting with one electric seraph and one magnetic seraph simultaneously; and b) the motive energy for a particle does not come from itself but from the lattice particles it interacts with. The feet of a particle have full access to the total energy of the particle at all times. So, interactions with electric (bull-faced) seraphim causes a matter particle to move in the fourth dimension while the magnetic (human, lion or eagle-faced) seraphim provide for motion in normal 3-D space. However, as I showed in the previous post, a particle cannot interact with more than one magnetic seraph at a time.

The Electric Field

The answer to the question "what causes the electric field?" is a little complicated but not too much. As an electron or positron travels in the fourth dimension, it interacts with e-seraphim and these are jettisoned from the points of interactions and sent traveling in random directions at the speed of light. Note that a positron is just an electron with its e-face pointing in the opposite direction in the fourth dimension. During an interaction, the face of an e-seraph will align itself in the opposite direction as that of the charged particle. This in turn creates either a positive or negative electric field, depending on whether the charged particle is an electron or a positron.

The problem with having lattice particles flying randomly at the speed of light away from the charged particle is that there is a lot of space to cover and relatively few moving particles. A charged particle placed anywhere in an electric field will sense (interact with) the radiating e-seraphim even if they don't collide directly, which is most of the time. Why is that? It has to do with something called non-locality and Ezekiel's wheel being covered with eyes. That's the subject of my next post in this series.

Thursday, September 9, 2010

Lattice Interactions, Part VII

Part I, II, III, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII, IX

Abstract

In Part VI, I argued for the existence of a special law or principle to govern interactions between normal matter particles and seraphim (lattice particles). The law stipulates that an interaction between a normal particle an a seraph occurs only if the particle is moving in the same direction that the seraph is facing. I also showed that Ezekiel's metaphorical text strongly suggests that a particle can move in only one direction/dimension at a time. However, it seems that there must be one exception to this rule. This is the topic of this post. Please read the previous installments before continuing.

Straight Legs and Calf's Feet

The primary reason for wanting to restrict the motion of a particle to one dimension at a time is that it makes it easy to determine how the particle's wings will interact with the seraphim in the lattice. This rule restricts interactions to only one seraph at a time. However, as I explained in my previous post, there is a problem with this rule. The reason is that every particle must move in the fourth dimension at the speed of light. This is required in order to keep the universe refreshed with a new 3-D slice of the 4-D lattice at every instant. In other words, there can be no wait periods between the jumps in the fourth dimension. If all motion occurred sequentially in only one dimension at a time, then motion in the fourth dimension would be forced to wait its turn. This is unacceptable. It seems that there must be an exception to the sequential interaction rule. I think this is what Ezekiel's metaphorical text is saying when he wrote in Chapter 1, verse 7:
Their legs were straight; their feet were like those of a calf and gleamed like burnished bronze.
In my current interpretation of the metaphorical texts, feet symbolize the ability of a particle to move in the fourth dimension at the speed of light. Legs are, of course, attached to feet and both contribute to motion. But why did Ezekiel write that the creatures' legs were straight? What could be the significance of having straight legs? I think it is calling attention to the fact that motion in the fourth dimension, unlike motion in the familiar 3-D space, is not composite, i.e., it does not consist of multiple vectors. It is a single straight motion. Normal 3-D motion, by contrast, consists of up to three components, depending on its absolute direction. While normal motion can be straight in the case of single dimension motion, this is extremely rare. Note also that the feet are said to "gleam like burnished bronze." I think this is a way to create a contrast between the two types of motion. Feet motion is hard, deterministic and unchanging. Wing motion, by contrast, is soft, non-deterministic and changes often.

As an aside, notice that Ezekiel identified the creatures' feet as being similar to those of a calf or bull. Since feet are used for motion in the fourth dimension, this tells us that the bull or calf is the symbol of the fourth dimension. Remember also that all the cherubim have four faces, one of which is that of a bull or calf. Likewise, one of the seraphim that comprise the sea of glass has the face of a bull. This knowledge will come in handy in the future.

Universal Heartbeat

The universe is like a humongous, massively parallel, discrete computer or, better yet, a huge cellular automaton. It has a universal discrete heartbeat that governs all interactions, huge numbers of which occur in parallel during every beat. Given the restrictions placed on particle motion in Ezekiel's text, it follows that every particle with bull's feet and face (such as the electron) interacts with a bull-faced seraph (e-seraph, see Part IV) during every heartbeat. This takes place in the fourth dimension and it is what generates and sustains the electrical field of a charged particle. However, no particle can have more than one non-bull interaction at a time. Non-bull interactions occur when a particle with one or more magnetic face moves in the familiar 3-D space, thus creating a magnetic field. In other words, no particle can move in more than one of the familiar three dimensions at a time.

In my next post, I'll have more to say about the electric field.

Monday, September 6, 2010

Lattice Interactions, Part VI

Part I, II, III, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII, IX

Abstract

In Part V, I argued against the relativistic explanation for the magnetic field generated by a moving charged particle. I explained that, since neutral particles can have a magnetic field, it follows that the magnetic and charged components of a particle are two independent properties and not the single unified phenomenon that the physics community has brainwashed itself into believing. I also argued against the fractional charge quark hypothesis. In this post, I explain why a particle must move in at least one of the three familiar dimensions in order to generate a magnetic field. Please read the previous installments.

Electromagnetism

I think it's important that I make my position on electromagnetism even clearer than I already have. I maintain that, contrary to the claims of the physics community, especially the relativity camp, it is not the electric component of a charged particle that generates its magnetic field. Although it may be true that a magnetic particle must also have an electric component (although I have doubts about it, I think an electric face might be required for motion in the fourth dimension), it is not true that an electrically charged particle must have a magnetic component, nor is it true that the magnetic field of a neutral particle is due to the electric charge of its component particles.

Faces and Jumps

To return to the topic of how magnetic fields are generated, consider that it is not any kind of motion that causes a particle to generate a magnetic field. Even though all normal matter particles, including electrons, are moving in the fourth dimension at c, an electron does not generate a magnetic field unless it is also moving in one or more of the three familiar spatial dimensions. The question is, why? I mean, we know that, as an electron moves in the fourth dimension, it does not interact with the magnetic seraphim that exist at every point in the lattice. We know this because a stationary electron does not generate a magnetic field.
It seems to me that there must exist some law or principle that prevents a normal particle from interacting with a seraph unless the particle is moving in the same dimension associated with the seraph's face. Can motion happen in more than one direction/face/dimension at a time? I don't think so and here is why. Notice that Ezekiel was very careful in his description of cherubim motion:
Ezekiel 1:12. Each one went straight ahead. Wherever the spirit would go, they would go, without turning as they went.
Later, in verse 17, he describes how the wheels move:
As they moved, they would go in any one of the four directions the creatures faced; the wheels did not turn about [d] as the creatures went.
As explained at the given link, the phrase turn about can also be translated as turn aside. This certainly sounds like the creatures and their wheels can move in only one of the four dimensions at a time. This would neatly explain how a moving particle generates a magnetic field: when it makes a jump, it interacts only with the seraph whose face corresponds with the direction/dimension in which it is moving. However, the problem with this restricted motion is that, since a particle is always moving in the fourth dimension at c, there would be no time left for any normal 3-D motion if all jumps have to happen sequentially. The reason is that, when a particle is moving at c, there can be no wait periods between the jumps. (see Physics, the Problem With Motion for more on discrete jumps). It would seem that a normal spatial jump should happen simultaneously with a fourth-dimensional jump but Ezekiel's text does not allow it. This is problematic. I'll continue my investigation in Part VII.

Wednesday, September 1, 2010

Lattice Interactions, Part V

Part I, II, III, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII, IX

Abstract

In Part IV, I wrote that Ezekiel's wheel likely symbolizes the electric field that surrounds charged particles. I also introduced the concept of elementary mass and hypothesized that it is equivalent to the mass of the electron. I was going to explore this concept further in this post but I think it's best that I do it some other time. In this post, I would like to explain how a charged particle creates a magnetic field and why it occurs only when the particle moves in the three familiar dimensions. In the process, I expose some of the crackpot nonsense that has been passing for science. Please read the previous installments before continuing.

Relativistic Garbage

Physicists teach us that only a moving charge can generate a magnetic field but they never explain why in a manner that makes any sense. In fact, there is reason to believe that this is not true at all, that it is possible to have a magnetic field without an electric charge. Sure, relativists try to BS one another with their length contraction non-explanation, which is not really an explanation since nobody knows why length contracts in the first place. However, the rest of us have enough sense to know that a point particle such as the electron cannot possibly have a length. Relativists will counter-argue that by length contraction, they are not referring to the moving particle but to the observed distance between moving charged particles. The tale is that this observed contraction makes the net charge appear bigger. However, this argument fails because a single moving charged particle will generate a magnetic field as well.

Furthermore, the relativistic magic does not explain why neutrons, which have no electric charge, can generate a magnetic field. Neutron stars, for example, are known to have an exceedingly strong magnetic field. Of course, the standard circular refrain is that a neutron consists of charged particles and that it is these charged particles that generate the field. To which I respond that the electric charge of the neutron is completely canceled, therefore its magnetic moment could not possibly have anything to do with the charges. As you can see, modern physics is resting on a huge mountain of crap. There is no end to it. Needless to say, we can promptly and safely dump the entire relativistic explanation for magnetism right back into the relativistic garbage heap from which it emerged. There may be some truths to relativity but this is certainly not one of them.

Quark Quackery

It is not hard to understand the reason that physicists insist without proof that only a charged particle can generate a magnetic field. The political correctness within the physics community is such that they must support relativity at all costs. In other words, unless you are prepared to kiss the giant collective ass of relativity, your career as a physicist will come to quick end, period. In my opinion, the unification of electric and magnetic interactions into a single phenomenon called electromagnetism has been a disaster because it has forced a mindset on researchers that has prevented them from considering or even seeing alternatives. Brainwashing is a bitch because it can ruin progress in science for centuries.

The truth is that there is no reason to suppose that a charged particle must also have a magnetic component. Likewise, there is no reason to believe that a magnetic particle must have an electric component. In the end, it all depends on whether or not they have electric or magnetic faces or both. But what can one say about quarks, those strange hypothetical particles of quantum physics that, we are told, have fractional charges? Are such hideous creatures even possible? The answer is a resounding no, of course. I have maintained that the charge of a particle is the result of its orientation in the fourth dimension and how this affects its interactions with the lattice. I mean, how can a particle have a fractional orientation? The quark concept is another one of those things that, like quantum superposition and virtual particles, physicists strongly believe in without actually observing them. Scientists love to bash religious folks for having faith while being guilty of the same.

Let's Face It

So why does a particle generate a magnetic field only when it is moving? It certainly has to do with lattice interactions but why is there a need for the particle to move in one or more of the three familiar spatial dimensions in order to generate a magnetic field? My hypothesis is that it happens for the same reason that an electric field is generated when a particle with an electric face moves in the fourth dimension. But why does a stationary electron not generate a magnetic field even though it has at least one magnetic face? It seems that, even if two particles have a face in common, they cannot interact unless one of them underwent a discrete jump in that dimension (see Physics: The Problem With Motion for more on particle discrete motion).

Let me rephrase this so as to make it as clear as possible. An electron generates an electric field by interacting with e-seraphim, not just because it has an e-face, but also because it is moving in the e-dimension, aka the fourth dimension. Its motion in the e-dimension does not generate a magnetic field even though the electron has at least one magnetic face. It must be moving in the direction it is facing in other to cause an interaction with seraphim of the same face. But why? I have an idea. I'll explain in Part VI.

Sunday, August 29, 2010

Lattice Interactions, Part IV

Part I, II, III, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII, IX

Abstract

In Part III, I hypothesized that, if electrons have only two faces (quantum spin directions in modern physics), there should exist three types of electrons, each with a different magnetic face. My reasoning is that, if bi-faced electrons were all the same, then they could interact with only half of the lattice particles. Another possibility is that every electron might have four faces, one for electric interactions and three for magnetic interactions. This would insure that they interact with all four types of seraphim in the lattice. In this post, I continue my investigation by examining the concept of the electric charge and, more specifically, how the electric field emerges from a particle's interactions with the lattice. I also introduce an exciting new interpretation of Ezekiel's wheels and the concept of elementary mass. Please read the previous installments before continuing.

Electric Seraphim, Ezekiel's Wheel and Nonlocality

The electric charge of a particle is a measure of the strength of its surrounding electric field. The latter is the result of the particle's motion along the fourth dimension and its repeated interactions with a specific type of lattice particles (electric seraphim or e-seraphim for short). My current understanding is that a huge number of e-seraphim are continually being jettisoned from the points of interaction at various angles. I believe that it is this emission that we observe as the electric field of a charged particle. The orientation of the faces of the emanating e-seraphim depends on whether or not the charged particle is positive or negative. Now, take a look at this diagram of a positron that I borrowed from Wikipedia:
Imagine that the radial arrows represent the paths of the emanating e-seraphim as they move away from the positron. I got to thinking that this is probably what Ezekiel's wheel symbolizes. Ezekiel wrote that the wheels that he saw in the vision were gigantic and it is a fact that the electric field of a charged particle can extend indefinitely. However, what is much more intriguing, from my perspective, is that Ezekiel insisted repeatedly that the spirit of the creatures was in the wheels and that the creatures and their wheels moved in unison.

This is all very exciting but what could it mean? I think it means just what it implies. The electric field that surrounds a charged particle moves with the particle without lagging. That is to say, regardless of how far away an e-seraph has moved from its parent particle, the two retain a nonlocal connection that causes the e-seraph to adjust its movement to reflect any movement of the parent. I think this is a prediction that can be tested in the lab. It won't be easy but I think it can be done. Of course, this squarely contradict's Einstein's dismissal of what he called spooky action at a distance. I may be wrong but, being the incorrigible rebel that I am, I am inclined to go with Ezekiel on this one.

Elementary Mass?

Here is a question that has intrigued me for a long time. Why is it that the absolute magnitude of the electric charge is the same for all charged particles regardless of their mass? For example, the proton is more than a thousand times more massive than the electron and yet the strengths of their electric fields are equal. From my perspective, this makes very little sense. The reason is that the magnitude or intensity of the electric field of a charged particle depends on the energetic level of its interactions with the lattice. Remember that every particle of normal matter is moving at the speed of light in the fourth dimension. Light speed motion requires that the total energy of the particle must be involved in every interaction with the lattice and that it must interact with a lattice particle of equal energy. Recently, it occurred to me that the mass of every truly elementary charged particle must be equal to the mass of the electron. This must mean that any charged particle that is more massive than the electron must be a composite particle. I think that this is one of the messages that Ezekiel's vision of the four creatures is trying to convey. I will return to this topic in my next post.

Thursday, August 26, 2010

Lattice Interactions, Part III

Part I, II, III, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII, IX

Abstract

In Part II, I wrote about Ezekiel's vision of strange symbolic creatures called cherubim. I wrote that cherubim represent normal matter particles and I gave a rundown of the various symbols and metaphors associated with seraphim and cherubim. In this post, I examine the electron in the light of my current interpretation of the ancient symbols. I also argue that there might be three types of electrons and that a positron is really an electron with a flipped orientation.

Why I Think that There Might Be Three Types of Electrons

Physicists tell us that the electron is a point particle and that it has several properties such as mass, charge and spin angular momentum. Spin is responsible for the electron's magnetic properties. We are told that the electron is a spin 1/2 particle meaning that its has two spin states or directions, +z and -z. Let us ignore the angular momentum nonsense (particles do not really spin) for now and suppose that the electron's spin is just a discrete property corresponding to its absolute, discrete direction. My hypothesis is that the scriptural symbol used for a particle's direction is the face and that a face can have one of two orientations, forward or backward. This would suggest that an electron has only one face and two possible orientations. However, I have good reasons to suppose that an electron has at least two faces, one for magnetic interactions and one for electric interactions (see paragraph below). Let's call them the magnetic face and the electric face for now.
As I wrote elsewhere, one of the four seraphim that comprise the lattice is associated with the electric charge while the other three are responsible for magnetic phenomena. The problem is that, if the electron only has one magnetic face, it can interact with only one of the magnetic seraphim in the lattice. This may not really be a problem but somehow I find it hard to believe that one half of the lattice is unused. I would seem that there should be three types of electrons. I'll get back to this important topic in an upcoming post.

The Real Difference Between Electrons and Positrons

As I mentioned above, an electron apparently has two faces, a magnetic face and an electric face, each of which has two possible orientations. What this means is that a positron is just an electron whose electric face is oriented in the opposite direction. In Part IV, I'll explore the finer details of electron/lattice interactions and electric fields in the light of the properties I have described so far.

Monday, August 23, 2010

Lattice Interactions, Part II

Part I, II, III, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII, IX

Abstract

Physics is about particles, their properties and their interactions. Everything else (distance, space, time, etc.) is either abstract or voodoo. In order for two particles to interact, they must have at least one property in common. In this post, I explain the meaning of the symbolic properties described in the ancient texts in greater detail and I examine the dubious concept of spin angular momentum. Please read Part I before continuing.

Cherubim, Seraphim and Their Strange Properties

About two and a half thousands years ago, an Israelite priest named Ezekiel described a vision in which he saw four cherubim (living creatures) each having a body, four faces, four wings, feet and hands. Ezekiel also wrote that he saw what appeared to be gigantic wheels next to the living creatures and that they had the appearance of wheels within wheels. Many have speculated that Ezekiel may have been observing extraterrestrials and their flying saucers. However, it does not take a genius to realize that Ezekiel's vision is purely symbolic. My current understanding is that Ezekiel's creatures and wheels were metaphors for an idealized or special type of composite particle and its properties. Elsewhere in the same book, Ezekiel describes another type of cherubim having only two faces. So obviously, just as there are several types of seraphim with their properties, there are also several types of cherubim with their own sets of properties.

The books of Isaiah and Revelation use symbols such as wings, faces, eyes and feet in connection with seraphim. Ezekiel's cherubim have additional properties such as bodies and hands. What follows below is a quick rundown of the symbols that I have decoded so far and what I think they represent.  (Please note that I am just a researcher and that I don't have a complete understanding of all the metaphors. One of my goals is to create a research institute whose purpose is to fully unravel all these mysteries. That will take money, but that's another topic.)
  • Sea of Glass. Both Ezekiel and the book of Revelation mention an immense crystal-like sea of glass. This is what I refer to as the lattice proper. Its primary function is to provide the energy needed to sustain motion. There can be no motion without the lattice because particles move in the lattice only by interacting with the seraphim. In turn, the interactions give rise to electric and magnetic phenomena.
  • Throne. Apparently, there is some sort of authority or central principle, if you will, that gives meaning to all properties and determines how they interact.
  • Seraphim. These are the energetic particles that comprise the lattice. There are four types of seraphim, each of which is associated with one of the four dimensions. Seraphim are originally at absolute rest. However, once dislodged via an interaction with another particle, they immediately begin to move at the speed of light by interacting with other seraphim. My current understanding is that one type of seraphim is associated with electric interactions and the other three with magnetic interactions.
  • Face. The face is the particle's orientation with respect to the four dimensions. A particle can have up to four faces, one for each dimension. A seraph only has a single face. Furthermore, a face can have either of two orientations, forward or backward.
  • Wing. The wing is one of four possible types of energy that a particle can have, the others being the body, the feet and the hands (see below). It is similar to what physicists call kinetic energy. Every particle must have wings in order to move in the lattice. Every wing is associated with one of the four dimensions and can be either positive or negative. Therefore, a non-composite particle can have up to eight wings.
  • Body. This is what physicists normally refer to as matter or mass but, in reality, it's just another form of energy. What is important to note here is that energy can be transfered from the body into the wings and vice versa. That's assuming, of course, that the particle has a body in the first place.
  • Feet. This property is apparently used to force all matter particles to move in the fourth dimension at the speed of light. This property is essential to my gravity hypothesis.
  • Hands. Hands are associated with grabbing behavior. It seems that composite matter particles need some mechanism to keep them from moving apart. This is probably related to what physicists refer to as the strong nuclear force.
  • Eyes. Eyes are normally associated with sensing at a distance. Having many eyes is a way of saying that one has the ability to sense what's going on around oneself without actually being there. I liken it to what quantum physicists call nonlocality.
  • Wheels. My current understanding of the wheel is that it represents the sphere of energetic influence that every particle seem to have on every other particle. This is not unlike what physicists call the wave function of a particle. Note that I am still debating in my mind the full meaning of Ezekiel's wheels. I will have more to say about them in a future article. And no, they are not flying saucers or chariots of the gods or alien spacecrafts or what not.
They Turned Not as They Moved

One of the things about particle physics that has always bothered me is the concept of quantum angular momentum otherwise known as the spin of a particle. It's obviously a bogus idea since a sizeless point particle cannot possibly have an angular momentum. Besides, angular momentum assumes the existence of continuity, a bogus concept. So I was immediately struck with a sense of excitement and joy when I read that Ezekiel's allegorical creatures moved straight forward and turned not as they moved. That's when I became totally convinced that I was onto something. One of the questions that I have asked myself is, which of the properties of cherubim and seraphim correspond to what physicists call spin and charge? Based on the known behavior of normal matter particles, it is not too hard to deduce which properties they have in common with lattice particles and which correspond to the ancient scriptural metaphors I listed above. This will the subject of my next post in this series when I discuss the electron, its charge polarity and its magnetic spin.