ELECTROMAGNETIC RADIATION                  

  • THE GENESIS OF emr AND RADIO

TRANSMISSION AND PROPAGATION ANALYSIS

  • ANTENNA AND RADIO RECEPTION MECHANICS

 

 

 

 

THE GENESIS OF emr AND RADIO TRANSMISSION AND PROPAGATION ANALYSIS:

 

I have arrived at the improbability of radio frequency wave emr being capable of being propagated as a sinusoidal wave through space and in concurrence with a few other historical and real time scientists I have arrived at the following conclusions, the reasons for which will be explained in depth.

The first conclusion is; that even if space is determined to have low impedance to emr, there is no known medium which has yet been described which allows such an action to occur, and considering the fact that the existence of an 'aether' has been disproved by the Michelson Morley experiment, such wave propagation therefore can not be concluded to be able to occur without the agency of some miracle or magic!

On the surface of it, G-theory could possibly be seen to be able to provide a kind of 'dark matter' medium which could involve compressive graviton propagation of wave fronts. However (even apart from the disallowance by VM multiplicity) we are faced with another profound problem that (as with sound through air), such propagation attenuates at a greater rate than inverse square law dictates because of energy losses to the medium, so hard data from universal observations also rule out any hope of 'compressive wave front propagation through a medium' as a possibility. In fact similar to the propagation of light and the phenomenon of gravity waves, then magic becomes an attractive propagation method. Note: it would have been nice for such dark matter to have been a promising candidate for an 'aether' capable of enabling light 'wave' propagation -even if it was gravitational and thus providing difficulties for GTR- but as well as dimensional separation criteria in G-theory, the same problem of attenuation still applies in standard theory. For the sake of simplicity I have not addressed other more complicated impediments such as possible GD variations (gravity waves).

In the case of both light and emr: The fact that according to G-theory, gravitons propagate in the gravitos (being a completely different dimension) also provides the most significant difficulty for any submission that emr could propagate through either of those dimensions, and even if either one or the other was able to be considered as the propagation medium, by a reiteration I will emphasize that both gravitons and photons would at the very lest present drag losses on other particles (namely each other) and there would still be a serious loss of energy in the emr wave.

This would result in much greater inversely proportional impedance over distance and the emr would attenuate to the degree that radio transmission through the vast distance of the universe would be considered to be impossible. In such a case, such theorized particle interference runs counter to the hard data being that radio emissions do indeed propagate across the reaches of space.

So it has more than likely become necessary to recognize the existence of another propagatory VM dimension which I have called the propos and also -from that basis- search out the behavior of atoms and electrons during radio frequency voltage oscillations within a conductor to find another plausible solution for emr emission to propagation phenomenology.

By the facts then; I am forced to apply myself to show that electromagnetic wave radiation (across the universe) at radio frequencies cannot occur by the method traditionally promoted in classical physics as wave propagation by compression of wave-fronts in an aether medium.

 At first it should be noted that according to G-theory, electric fields as well as magnetic fields are singularly-separate-dissimilar 'near or proximity field' phenomena and although the classical fields expand at 'c' (which is no surprise) they unfortunately for such a theory posses a decay rate over distance dependant on square relatable laws and they do NOT exhibit as a combined phenomenon by somehow cohorting in space in any conceivable manner at all.

Utilizing Lorentzian relativistic formulas, (which seems to be the only other way out of the enigma) is unlikely to achieve any concrete result because unfortunately that enterprise is encumbered by the necessary and ridiculous idea that free space actually has no dimensions. "Hey; the Emperor has no clothes either!"

Pondering such a dilemma we should take note perhaps of the fact that the permitivity (electrical) in free space is known to be 10e-12 farads per meter, and the (magnetic) permeability is 10e-6 henrys per meter. However it is very significant for the case I am about to present that even this valuation of permeability is only allowable when propagated through a rolled sheet of copper, and I for one certainly didn't notice one of those in free space as I drove by!

So then we are directed to appreciate with some simplification; that the law of increasing the square of the medium per meter, paradoxically results in inverse square law of field strength diminishment (attenuation)* which even with the proposed help of Lorentzian physics (which acts according to hyperbolic law) still disallows emr propagation from being able to cross the vast distances envisaged in space because of such annoying abrogative attenuation. By way of being a further nuisance I must explain that even when considering any of these phenomena at all, one must first assume that free space is a conductor, WHICH IT DEFINITELY IS NOT! Go on someone; show us all. Where is the experimentally derived empirical evidence that free space is a conductor? Show us the electron flow! OK what about the energy return path then? Lightening phenomenology shows that it is an insulator until an atmospheric medium sometimes causes the breakdown of the insulator.

In regard to this analysis I must firmly state that the acceptance of Lorentz's formula or any others (including G-theory) should not merely be by capitulation to specious or popularist assumptions which are mostly agenda driven 'takeaways' procured with a convenient disregarding for contrary evidence. Rather; the scientific method should be by working backwards from the actually observed reality of hard data as being the empirical scientific facts, and then determining whether relativity or adding 'c' into the mix actually works or not. Of course some argue that we shouldn't let little things like facts get in the way of a good theory!

*Probably by inverse cube law for mutual relationship in static point fields. Some even declare cubic or fourth power inverse law or greater for square faced real world magnets. That appears to be similar to the law that applies to biracial force and SBF.

 

Now if you have the definition of 'a good theory' cast aside into the WPB, the relativistic postulation may then seem to be logical to you. But how can that be, if it is all simply because a dimension somehow appears to have proportionality reliance to a constant 'c' being married to some weird ill fitting proposal for a moving space time continuum which somehow becomes relativised even though it is only time relevant to the emr -which by the way it is illegal to relativize- So if it can't then possibly be the speed of the emr being relativized to reduce the space 'd' value to acceptable propagation distances then it has to be the space itself moving at 'c' relative to the emr. That is just a relative swap of observational reference frames which is exactly what has been done but the problem of relativizing the emr still remains. There is no relativistic solution for the propagation of light /emr without major attenuation problems arising. Of course the obvious stupid answer is--- Well relativity must be true because that's what we observe!

I contend it is far more plausible to consider that the emission speed of 'c' is reliant upon another VM dimension as previously described. Note: the close reliance of 'c' and 'y' on the eos will be analyzed in a following chapter. This phenomenon would also likely apply to emr propagation speed.

What often occurs in such a case as this (when there is either an intuition or even worse--- a sudden recognition of a fact leading to a well parried fact-acceptance-defect); is that one is then able to 'assume' proof of an effect by some other postulated fantastical cause and even engage in the fudging of results to fit, which I would venture to suggest is effectively carrying out scientific skullduggery. However in this case a substantial amount of egg might well become plastered all over some faces when/if it finally becomes recognized that in actual fact the emr propagation effect is really being caused by an as yet unrealized dimensional combining phenomenon which actually provides a logical and un-fudged fit to the data. Such a theory is yet to be adjudicated but I'm going to put it all on the line in the logic and rationality stakes right here right now!

The problem against the longevity of relativistic interpretations becomes severely exacerbated as soon as it becomes glaringly obvious that G-theory neither requires space to be a conductor at all nor for the necessary placement of a tube of copper for emr transmission nor does it require a medium. As evidence in support of my philosophical meandering above, it should be noted that this little known 'copper tube' FACT has gone conveniently unstated in the historical formulations of emr wave theory. FRAUD!

I KNOW the formulas work! You just need a huge crowbar to make them fit to anything real. It is the total lack of understanding of the mechanics of the whole 'emr' propagation through space which forces science to ride roughshod over blatant illogical dilemmas and engage in the dark art of 'convenient fact exclusions'.

At the risk of turning this book into a thesis solely devoted to attacking relativity, I wish to once again point out just one more query to be added to the already long list of serious and model destroying problems with relativistic theories.

Consider this in addition to the prior argument: First of all it becomes necessary to logically assume that relativists must generally believe that light is an emr. If this is the case then the Lorentzian formula for the propagation of emr should necessarily (for the same reason) also apply to light. This statement I declare to be a rational deduction. Considering all of that as being the case then, they are faced with a serious problem. I.e. if any relativistic formula at all is taken to apply to the propagation of light which is an assumed URF constant, then it must apply to light in every direction of propagation at the same time. This in turn makes a screwball of both Euclidian and even more enigmatically geodesic space, especially one with an accelerating space-time gravitational metric!

The result of all that is; no notice is now able to be taken of observed distances which have been calculated by trigonometry via observed binocular angular displacement (by radio and optical both), and by consequence the size or age of the universe then becomes indeterminable. Note: because of the ubiquitous energy formula E=mc2, relativistic forms are somewhat valid at the quantum level. So for reasons of simplicity there is no real need to change them in practice. Simply stated it can be expressed that: "It should be recognized that relativity is only a mathematical tool for calculation because like a 'line' it doesn't actually exist and it is not actually 'time or distance' that's varying. Such a postulation has become a subjectively required belief in order to elicit some reasoning behind some otherwise magical proposal as an explanation for observed but otherwise inexplicable and as yet non-substantive phenomenology".

Equations don't prove a theory, no matter how prodigiously expansive they may be. It is well known that in many instances the same results can be arrived at by both relativistically elegant and unimaginatively puny classical formulas.

The end result of relativistic interpretations when the universe is considered as a whole; is that there must be an infinite number of time frames of reference for both inertial and accelerative considerations. The end result of such mathematical forms is net sum zero. To analyze such within singular plane vector algebra is invalid science. The scientists who engage themselves in the mind boggling equations of geodesic metrics in 4D space time; fail to see the trees for the forest! Why not 5 space then? 6 space??

All that aside: you are probably wondering by now how G-theory propagation statistics operates and how G-theory can possibly provide a velocity constant 'c' to emr. Well the last ones the easiest. The 'c' is caused by propagation speed within atoms--- as previously described and this causes the propagation rates as determined by Maxwell to be the stand alone propagation speed of fields -being thought to consist of some sort of charge and magnetism flux or 'stuff'. Even though further derivation of equations shows that free space even though essentially an insulator; just like all insulators does have some real and calculable impedance (which is calculated in Ohm's); even by these relativistic functions space is then somehow and incomprehensibly declared by prominent physicists to actually not have any 'real' impedance by some inexplicable and perhaps convenient lapse of logic! However I intend to show a logical reason for why they are in fact correct.

The currently recognized far-field impedance (Z) of 377 Ohm's* in space seems problematically impossible to correlate (not only with relativity) but with the concrete requirements for any realistic application of permitivity and permeability functions?! In my theory however; if this is indeed the impedance; this is stupidly considered to be the Z of the non existent 'dimensionless emr conductor'. Ta dah; G-man to the rescue! It can be stated that there is no requirement for any conductivity at all for the propagation of emr in the propos dimension.

*If you think that seems to be a low impedance for an insulator. OK; then give me a chunk of porcelain the size of space and I will show you even less impedence!

 

There is no logical dilemma here because the propos is unable to be directly measured, and similar to the photos it can be seen to be synonymous to a theoretical particle conveyer belt. So the same requirements and inherent difficulty don't exist by this theory and the normal formulas can still be applied and a Z modified inverse square law is applicable. NB: But now however the logical dilemma has vanished.

Even with relativity based arguments, such problems of logic make these electromagnetic forces surprising candidates to transmit anything at all over any realistic distances. Even Coulomb's electrostatic law should confirm suspicions that classical emr would be a non starter even with the existence of some sort of aether!

I must state here that the theory suggests that the emr fields have nothing to do with the propagation. They are just coincidental. It is particles which are being propagated.

So there is now no problem with the fact that the magnetic affect of the sun appears to defy Maxwell and reach across the solar system; because this can be explained by two reasons.

1/ The sun has about twice the magnetic force (gauss) of the earth, which being multiplied by a far greater volume calculates by power law into a far more 'size massive' magnetic field. I.e. it is phenomenal!

2/ The magnetic influence of the sun which is being exerted on the nether regions of the solar system is in all likelihood by the emission of solar wind particles with magnetic dipoles and not directly by its field!

The actual magnetic value depreciation of the sun's magnetic field is still in accordance with inverse square law, so in comparison to all magnetic fields it still weakens at the same rate as other magnetic fields and this would also apply to emr even if Maxwell's field propagation laws were applicable to it, which it doesn't because they are not!

Electromagnetic radiation is not emitted simply because of internal energy gain of atoms. This would result in other types of energy emission which we have already discussed. By G-theory it is declared to be fundamentally the derivative of a radiation effect caused by oscillatory charge effects in nuclei in collusion with electrons moving in a conductor, in a similarly oscillatory manner. I.e. By the 'back and forth' motion in a conductor, which is caused by electrons 'hopping' between the outer conductance bands of adjacent atoms. An atom then uses the energy gained from electron motion through syncopation to convert that by force to resultant nucleon motion. Note: All fermion energy behavior described here is determined to be quantasized and subject to Pauli and Fermi, except for electric and magnetic fields. The quantum actions are deemed to be energy related by particle motion alone and subject to QIP.

We can now state that this electron motion causes the atomic nucleus to vibrate in synch, because, as we considered before: the electron has a bilateral force relationship with the nucleus by electromagnetic g-factor and form factor charge variability. This vibrational motion (allowed by quantum steps) of the nucleus must be recognized as *absorption of energy from the electron shell/s and it requires the re-emission of that energy, only to again be followed by the like regaining of energy, all in synch with the momentary loss and gain of electrons in its conductance band orbital as they travel back and forth between atoms.

*This is because whenever an atom loses an electron. The nucleus must change energy state by one (half if you will by nuclear sharing) quantum number. This all occurs with some elasticity and therefore proportional energy loss by BBR, so the efficiency coefficient is less than one according at the least by the fine structure loss constant. This loss is required for the conditionally instantaneous (really at 'c')*' 'conservation of energy' in the atom and it is not to be envisaged as an overall nucleon electromagnetic value gain or loss. The energy put into electron motion is provided by the external oscillatory voltage source acting on the conductor and it is this energy which is available to be lost by RF emission etc.

*'NB. This 'c' is not a mistake on my part by being any acceptance or appeal to Lorentzian relativity. The speed of light here has nothing to do with fields; rather, like I have said before by eigenvector summed electron motion in the orbitals of the conductor atoms.

 

Now apart from some BBR, in an elastic system the instantaneously evaluated energy loss still has to go somewhere! This electron induced force field vibrational effect on the nucleus does not cause emr, it causes the particular proton which has existence in the 'propos' as well as the 'magnos and force-field' to act in the observance to the law of the conservation of energy (state) which causes it to pulsate out stream after stream of radions and magnetons*, which I will call ramatons -not to be confused with gravi-photons- at the same frequency -not necessarily phase- as the oscillator. This is further controlled by the electron motion in and out of adjacent and subsequent nuclei via the propos until the event horizon (surface) atom emits the ramatons into the propos which according to the pertinent laws and principles, at an emission speed of 'c'.

*The ramatons may subjectively be declared to trace an electromagnetic 'wave' as they travel. ---Same particles different VM statistics. This is different than light transmission because it is unaffectedly omni directional and the various magnetic and electric components may exhibit variations in eigenstate divergences.

 

There is a lot going on in the atoms that needs to be addressed. The oscillatory affect of the external emf on the nucleus does change the proton's charge but in normal radio transmission never to negative -under strictly controlled conditions- or this would result in ionization of the conductor and it would necessarily, melt, fly apart and fail.

As we saw in the static example of electromagnetism, the electron orbitals (sites) elongate in synch with the emf waveform and the nucleon dipoles wobble accordingly, and as a direct result the electrons would be observed to travel with some elasticity from one side of the nucleus to the other. Note: This elasticity puts a practical upper limit on radio frequencies. In wave guides at microwave frequencies the electrons orbitals snap as square waves and light may even be produced by this phenomenon.

 In this standard radio sine wave type transmission; It is this elastic electron motion which induces the proton to become in effect momentarily 'energy confused'. The electroweak force em component and the electron elicited 'neutrino forward scattering' component of weak force become mutually out of phase** so the normally expected photon emission is not the result and the proton then releases radions and magnetons as ramatons to the propos all around.

This occurs when the near-field induced magnetic field changes, (being caused by the electron motion) interact with the nucleon dipoles causing them to emit a string of magnetons during one 'half cycle' and a string of radions during the next because in a quantum relationship the radions and magnetons are constrained to parity (balance) in proportion to the eigenstates of the phase relationships noted above.

By way of further explanation: This is determined per atom according to its oscillating individual magnetic dipolic/quark orientation*. This causes an elastic force interaction which results in electron lag which also means that the nucleus is experiencing an oscillatory energy disparity within itself. This is because at each half cycle the conductor switches magnetic pole orientation from the center or inside to aim out to the nearest surface, dependant on whether the conductor is solid or tubular respectively. Note: such an energy disparity is fully dependant on the oscillatory emf being of sufficient value to cause an elasticity productive electron-nucleus disparity of greater than a quantum integer. In microwave guides the reflected signal returns in descending orders of harmonics which is the energy which squares up those waves. A lot of power can be sent very efficiently down the guide in the form of very solid wave fronts or really particles fronts.

*This is because in the interactive relationship of the EWF and the electron orbitals--- the EWF operates at 'c' while the electron field changes are (almost) instantaneous by 'snapping' phenomenology. Dipoles in non-magnetic materials always fall back to their original relative position when the external or near magnetic field is removed. They would only move slightly conditional with their characteristics.

**This means that the interaction phase relationships are affected by frequency, conductor impedance, tuning (f=1/2pi rt LC), materials and size/physical shape statistics etc.

 

Now because the normal angular orientation of the nuclear poles in a non magnetized conductor (for reasons which will be forthcoming) can be declared to be averaged and alternatively at or about 45 degrees in equilibrium (at ground state). Therefore half the dipoles in vector summation have to shift beyond 90 degrees during one 'half cycle' and less than 45 degrees during the other half cycle in the opposite direction. This means that because the conductor has impedance which is active in elasticity, the electron lag is increased and can be even 'tuned' to a particular resonance by standard methods to cause ramaton 'wave' reinforcement. Note: Common variations caused by real world 'permanent magnetism' will not cause a significant change in the average g-factor of the nuclei unless the magnetism was severe enough. In transmissions permeability and magnetic properties will have some affect on the transmit ability of fields.

Take particular note of the following patent, especially the part regarding the transmission of magnetic fields alone. Also refer to Rubee below.

  http://www.google.com/patents/US6628118

 

 

So in one 'half cycle' of synchronized phase relationship, any given atom will emit radions and on the other half cycle magnetons because of differing nuclear energy disparities with electrons which is further based on dipole orientation shifts. (The 'next door neighbor nucleus' might be reacting in the opposite manner). The typical forward scattering neutrinos are passed directly through electron orbitals where they become ramatons in the now different VM dimension* called the propos. Note: This doesn't discount perturbative effects. Such action is of course a loss of energy which is re-supplied by internal bosonic convection which dimensionally bypasses the electron shells and is passed from nucleus to nucleus at 'c'.

*The VM dimensions are the result of the activities of nuclear g and form factors alone.

 

These 'packetized streams' arrive at the surface at slightly different times and they overlap but on average they would reinforce. This may require that an antenna must be of certain thickness, or tubular, guided etc. for maximum efficiency.

These actions occur all the way along the conductor to the antenna so 'shielding' is often required, and reflective actions of the shield can also prevent radiation until either the grounded or dielectric antenna is reached whereby (in the latter case) reflective current reinforcement by electron dielectric phenomenon takes place to facilitate the emission of the radio waves.

Now this all occurs mostly by dielectric action at the antenna which is tuned to reinforce the 'wave' fronts by the aforementioned science that I am not gong to address any further because it is all well known and founded.

It would take too much energy to cause a single conductor to emit sufficient ramatons for most applications. This is why wave reinforcement is necessary.

We can receive lots of radio signals from stars because they have 'plenty of energy to burn' and the radio signal decay law is similar to that which affects light. However it becomes obvious, that even the structure of stellar bodies is able to act (albeit by chance) in a way that reinforces ramaton emission in certain directions.

Electron 'flow' in the antenna does not need to occur and INDEED IT MAY NOT especially at high frequencies, in which case the conductor is acting very much more like a true dielectric material. In fact direct current flow can be an impediment to radio transmission. SWR behavior and interactions between VM dimension -which do occur- are another subject.

Again; the energy source for the transmission of ramatons is transferred directly by 'bucket brigade' from the emf source as positive conventional flow dynamics, which is by sub generation particle and/or boson transfer. The antenna can be a tuned-whip etc. in which manner losses of any significance due to electrons emissions can be contained*. The energy loss is countered by provision at more or less a steady average rate from the emf source. Note: Herein lays a significant support for the conventional flow theory of electricity.

  *There goes another dilemma which exists in current theories which in direct contrast require electron emission as a prerequisite for emr wave formation. Model support for those theories is nil because such electron emission does not match up with the hard data.

 

So then at the surface of the conductor the ramatons are emitted in a tuned stream of magnetons followed by a stream of radions, each related to one half cycle which together make up one cycle 'wavelength' at the oscillator frequency. These are both simply VM vacuum modified neutrino emissions which would be considered to be photons in another VM dimension called the photos but ramatons in the propos.

These streams of particles (even though still contained within their own dimensions) travel as separate distinct packets* in the propos and -contrary to traditional theory- are not emitted from electrons but by the emitting protons EWF superstructs at 'c'.

External energy inputs (to atoms) that do not have a charge or radio frequency component will only cause BBR, photon emission and or convection but will not cause  VM statistical change and so facilitate any substantial ramaton emission. The RF spectrum has harmonic elastic interactivity with the nuclear form and g factors to instigate the VM**.

*Once 'packetized'; bosons remain so, and keep equal distance from each other and more so from other types of boson packets in the same dimension. So they line up and exit the conductor in geometrically constrained 'marching abreast' fashion. Note: This is quite often not quite the case and this 'phase problem' can cause parasitic affects which are undesirable and historically, various engineering methods have been undertaken to counteract this.

 **Such phenomena will provide an upper and lower limit to the frequency of radio transmission.

 

There will be no measurable effect on gravity or mass during this action within the conductor. Simultaneous emissions will also be occurring along the length of the conductor, but for reasonably effective 'emr' to occur the effect is magnified by well known means which I don't have to get into because from here it's all simply radio theory as per standard physics.

 What is not standard is my contention that it's not the phenomenology of a 'combining of electric and magnetic fields in space' that's causing the propagation of the RF energy. It is by way of the previously described combination of a photon like ramaton boson consisting of radions (dimensionally shifted gamma particles) and magnetons (gamma--gluon--anti-gamma particle*), and these have no charge and insignificant mass, and just like their photos emitted photons they require no classical media for their propagation as ramatons over the propos.

*All consisting of trions. To wit- biracial neutrinos. This is what they would be if they were going to be transmitted as light in the propos. The particles are describable and recognizable by there standard names but the VM state always needs to be taken into account.

 

At this point I find it necessary to state that- "dimensionally subjugated biracial gamma particle recombination which forms a N-S magneton dipole, requires the absorption of one gluon as BBR." Conversely- "the magneton decay to biracially and dimensionally separated gamma particles requires the temperatures and gluon rich environment of Q-G plasma, as exhibited in magnetars etc. as well as in synchrotron (and most likely lightening) phenomenology here on earth."

The only other place that this occurs is within a quark lattice. Such nuclear phenomenology occurs constantly where electric currents and fields or magnetic fields are observed to be behaving as described herein.  

I will now address a likely objection regarding the proposed particle versus classical wave propagation. I.e. "your proposed particle propagation will still be attenuated by inverse square law as well!"

In answer to such an objection I will consider that to not be a correct conclusion but I'm glad you said that because that proves you really do have a real problem with classical theory; one which cannot explain how impedance in space is a constant. With G-theory I do have an answer. The propos provides any necessary impedance as part of its properties.

The objection to this will likely be. 'You have just shifted the answer to another unknown'. Exactly correct! But science is not about leaving an enigma hang about for centuries when a truly logical solution is able to be 'entered'.

Science is mostly about the search for logical propositions that in additive combination provide a better model fit to observations'. So in this way if you can get scientific knowledge closer to the true factual nature of things you can enjoy better predictability in theory, and more importantly improved PREDICTABILITY of experiments and a framework for broader innovation , and two predicative cases to point are.

1/ The Large Hadron Collider will not create black holes according to G-theory. If they create any black 'spots' at all they will simply be micro black holes or bubbles of perfect vacuum which wouldn't hang around for very long*!

2/ Nuclear fusion reactors will not be able to produce an overall positive energy result, also according to this theory. I say; LET G-THEORY STAND OR FALL ON THESE TWO PREDICTIONS!

*Sun spots are likely to be similar.

 

Further evidence of this separately propagated magnetic and electrical energy theory may be offered in that an American company has developed a wireless visibility system called RuBee* that does not transmit an electromagnetic 'wave'. It only transmits magnetic 'waves' I.e. By G-theory that would be streams of magnetons.

*RuBee is a trademark of Visible Assets, Inc.

 

Electrons would not be considered to be transmitted into the 'aether' for the purpose of emr propagation, their job is to simply to cause protons to 'suck energy' from the emf source and transfer it by converting it into emission of ramaton particles in oscillator driven wave-fronts, and the rest is as described. Of course in the real world anomalies are to be expected.

Another problematic postulation in the current paradigm is that electric and magnetic field waves are somehow able to propagate through space without requiring a medium at all. I.e. I'm not referring to any magical, invisible undetectable 'aether' theory.

Apart from such magic and the other difficulties that I outline herein; please explain how this can possibly occur! (Near-field charges and magnetic fields are always at the very least an inverse square law depleting force field which does not propagate independent of the point/s cause/s of the fields). For emr wave propagation to occur, space has to have an electromagnetic conductor of some description! Up until this presentation of G-theory the conduction medium has not been found and magic is all you've got!

Scientists; by radio and antenna technology are able to manipulate the ramaton density pulses (radio waves) to cause them to be emitted in phase and become amplified and even spatially and orientationally directed by polarization. Note: SSB operation is a modulating function of the radio transceiver, and sidebands are not transmitted as separate carrier wave (CW) entities. CW is the actual transmitted radio signal frequency which is able to be modulated by the data signal. AM, SSB, FM and DIGITAL are simply modulation or signal modification techniques to enable the transmission of such information.

In conclusion I must state that the particle constituency of ramatons is an educated guess at best. The difference between photons and ramatons as either particles or their emission statistics -which I favour- is seen to be necessary because photons are emitted at the frequency of the form factor wave which is determined by the energy state disparity which is causing the ejection of the photon from the quark lattice, and ramatons are emitted at the frequency determined by the oscillator according to the phenomenology just analyzed and are considered to have been dimensionally shifted because of the changes in the inter-nucleon quark lattice deformation relationships caused by the voltage changes of the oscillator. Photons do not require an external voltage for their emission.

The actual relationships between elementary particles I will have to leave to another time. However it needs to be considered that perhaps my proposed lowest fundamental biracial 'trions' may need to be investigated. These would be basic sub-sub 'force' particles which can be morphed and multi-dimensionally enjoined by the internal fundamental particle data sets at any moment to become all other fundamental particles.

This couldn't occur without the existence of gravitons in order to re-supply the nucleons to meet the requirements of the law of the conservation of energy which would otherwise seem to be flouted. In the radio transmitter, the long term (at 'c') energy is re-supplied from the oscillator so no obvious (overall large scale) gravitational effects would be noticed during radio transmissions. Note: Chemical re-supply of energy is a local affect.

The particles in ramatons may contain sufficient constituent matter to be able to help resupply neutrons, electrons, pions and their anti or opposite charge particles under the right conditions. However whilst traveling in the form of ramatons they are kept dimensionally separated as per the photonic/gravitonic behavior, but it is unclear whether or not they have the same relationship with the gravitos. I suspect that they do. The ramatons are also absorbed back into the quark lattice upon reception and are also able to cause photon reemission. Note: Place a piece of metallic foil in a microwave oven and see what happens.

Observations of these very occurrences during particle collisions, has led some scientists to believe that all matter is made up of some form of emr. This is also a novel approach but I await the convincing theoretical analysis in the real world with sarcastic anticipation of more pseudo science because such theories still rely on relativistic assumptions which can never lead to rational real world explanations. Many different relativistic formulas are required for each and every problematic observance, unfortunately I would not be alone in suggesting that after all this time there remains little hope of finding a unifying equation.


 

 

 

 

ANTENNA AND RADIO RECEPTION MECHANICS:

 

 

 This brings us to the point where we must analyze a paradox; which is why some materials such as antenna dishes reflect ramatons and some devices such as a receiving antenna connected to a coil of wire (even of non magnetic copper for instance) absorb the ramatons and reconvert them into electron flow pulses. Note: Microwave mechanics remains subject to further analysis because of my admitted inability to fully determine their status as being either photonic or ramatonic. They could be a combination. However this is no problem for the theory.

It is interesting to note that at the terahertz range of frequencies between microwave-radiation and infrared; even within the paradigm of the current understanding of the physics, wave theory morphs into wave/particle duality theory in any case. My spin on this is that there is an overlap of photon-ramaton emission. In fact high power radio transmission can conditionally result in the simultaneous emission of both ramatons and photons even at lower frequencies.

First and foremost we must consider the propagation media, and then the reflective or absorbent media parameters after that:

So we know from previous analysis that ramaton density pulses can propagate through any media in which the proton, neutron and electron don't exist in (have no connection with) the propos or magnos, which is definitely true of space, and to a lesser extent air and much less true with water and significantly dense other materials. Note: Similar to light; apart from direct dimensional interaction of particles, the perturbative affect of fermions on ramatons with proportionality to density should not be underestimated.

These media event horizons have everything to do with the potential for the reflection or reception of ramatons. Most metals according to the 'god code' are dielectric-negative as well as opaque to emr or ramaton particles because their protons have a presence in the propos. This means that they will not allow the passage of ramatons.

Curiously they are not very receptive to them either, but this is because protons* don't want to receive energy of any kind unless it is in synch with their natural vibration (and other previously described quantum restrictions), which is very high; perhaps at light frequencies and above depending on the material.

*Or the proton g and form factors. The frequency of a whole nucleus, atom or molecule is significantly much lower and temperature dependant a well.

 

Because of these reasons antennae actually reflect/refract and generally re-concentrate the dualistic ramaton pulses; which translates to the normally accepted manner described in physics, but the ramatons are actually received from the antenna in a coil of RF energized wire. I.e. a conductor. (Crystal sets work without any power because of anomalies in all materials which will cause some natural acceptance of the ramaton pulses into nuclei which causes miniscule voltage oscillations in a tuned coil of wire).

During radio reception, the emf is once again an applied force (electron current generator) which is therefore causing the motion of electrons, (often in a transformer coil) at the selected 'tuned' frequency which harmonically matches the frequency of the ramaton 'wave' in question. However in some cases there may be a component of direct current through the receiving coil.

Regardless of the reception technology, the nuclear phenomenology is that the proton is again being affected by the force of electrons hopping outer orbitals in the conductance band. Because of electron propagation delay in the conductor this hopping occurs as finite hops of electrons at a certain artificially applied frequency but at much lower power to avoid spurious transmission, and by manipulating the receiving coil scientists have worked out how to harmonically match the frequency of the incoming ramatons by tuning methods utilizing well understood science.

So because the energizing emf is very low the proton won't re-emit much of the energy via ramatons, photons or BBR. It will fundamentally react in an elastic quantum level electromagnetic manner in synch with the motion of electrons hopping in and out of its outer conductance band orbitals. Note: Spurious radio (ramaton) remissions can still occur, and steps are taken to avoid this by shielding and other means.

The mechanics may be further described as follows: At the very instant in which the proton is in a state of energy depletion, being for all intents and purposes considered to be at the same moment that an electron hops out of its outer orbital and is moved sideways by the oscillator induced voltage, it (the proton) will be receptive to an incoming ramaton or two. I.e. radio energy. This happens to all atoms in the 'tuned' circuit simultaneously (at 'c') and the bulk of the ramatons are received as radion after magneton into the respectively receptive protons.

This action results in the proton now gaining a net energy increase, and as soon as another electron hops into its outer orbital, subject to PEP it will immediately pass the ramaton particle (in other bosonic forms) down the proton-proton 'bucket brigade'.

When full throughout the length of the conductor*,  they also all pass some excess energy to the outer orbitals in synch with the unidirectional hopping of the electrons, and the electrons become forced by the energy cycles of the proton to decrease the electron hopping density and then increase it over and over again in frequency synch.

What is happening here is transference of protonic energy in a pulsating manner to either interrupt or support the ebb and flow of electrons as the case may be, which when further manipulated with say an electronic low impedance 'sink' such as a capacitor, it is able to be 'tuned' and this will cause them to travel back and forth (oscillate) through the outer shells by well known electronic phenomena. Note: Antenna tuning and phasing is simply providing 'wave' and mechanical reinforcement for both transmission and reception and that is another subject.

*Because all of the atoms are acting in a similar fashion which happens almost instantaneously at 'c', although not quite equally through out the cross section of the conductor. This can result in some undesirable effects I.e. skin effect).

 

This movement of electrons is now either a pulsing or (by LC transformer tuning), an alternating electric current which is harmonically in synch with the incoming ramaton 'wave' frequency by near-field electromagnetic effects (so selected by the tuning and other mechanics) so that all the information on the 'waves' is amplified and can then be more readily utilized. A poorly tuned antenna or out of tune receiving coil will cause ramatons to be reflected. Some antennae will exhibit anomalous near-field effects because of the 'nothing's perfect law' of nature and/or poor antenna tuning.

The overall depletion or gain of ramatons is normally under control of the eos dimension, which has been stated to be able to be overridden by local emf's*, which is therefore the case in this example.

In the mechanics described above; if the local radio frequency emf is switched off, nucleon charge balance maintained by nucleonic boson density parity requirements is instantaneously performed by the eos dimension and the ramatons will henceforth be reflected if the antenna is not directly or elastically grounded. Note: Other fermions and bosons are theorized to be active decision makers via the EWF regarding ramaton reception into a proton, as well as for inter-nuclear transference, and transmission.

*Discounting any quark lattice activity at this point we should be able to agree that actual electromagnetic transfer in atomic media occurs at about 'c' and it is caused by local forces in the force-field dimension. This in no way enforces a requirement for electrons to individually travel along a conductor at 'c'. However electron depletion/enrichment etc. is another subject which will not be addressed at this juncture. Note: Background radiation in space is most probably the most noticeable effect of the eos, and charged BBR particle propagation is also another balancing phenomenon being promoted over time at unknown speed. Otherwise there is no known phenomenology in the traditional physics whereby background x-ray radiation is permitted to just be 'hanging around' in space!!!

 

This brings us to a conclusion that when electrons flow in a conductor from -ve to +ve and the conductor emits either photons or ramatons, then those photons, radions and magnetons must be passed as quantities of indefinable bosons -likely neutrino forward scattering- via the nucleus to nucleus bucket brigade mechanics from the +ve to –ve terminals of the emf supply. This must occur in order to meet the conservation of energy requirements as well as a couple of laws of thermodynamics. Any oversupply of absorbed ramatons will result in BBR and/or photonic emission as well as possible ramatonic reemission. Note: The latter occurrence might result in a visit from a radio inspector.

 The energy state of the conductor can exhibit losses through convective and photonic (heat) losses and this also must be replaced by the emf supply. So in summation we understand that all energy required to do the 'work' of emitting and also receiving (conditionally) any kind of energy from the conductor whether purposeful or not, is supplied by the external energy source E.g. a battery via an oscillator.

A further conclusion is: Maxwell is still correct in his electromagnetic field propagation resolutions. It's just that the build velocity of field formation as he determined is incorrect and also magnetic fields do not extend far enough, or electric fields for that matter, to enable the transmission of radio waves currently theorized as any emf force field very far into space at all, even if indeed space is a scalar Euclidian dimension as proposed and there is no propagation medium or aether. Note: Refer to Maxwell's errors.

G-theory is not problematic in any regard and it is therefore the 'probable fit model' in being able to describe a mechanics of causality for the observable effects as presented. If it cannot be accepted that ramatons are combinations of force carrier bosons (which I have suggested they are) then apart from the dud relativity and the dud wave theory which cannot show a propagation medium, then we must otherwize be forced to consider emf propagation to consist of virtual particles and such a theory is a non starter and by consequence science will once again be left to defend this solution called magic.

Note: The operation of the eos is described in depth elsewhere in this book. It should perhaps be explained at this point that the eos is a dimension which is multi-dimensionally restricted to mostly instantaneous transactions which are thought to be over distances of less than a femtometer. But that's all it takes to provide instantaneous momentum!

It is most likely that there will be many reservations regarding the idea of anything approaching instantaneous 'charge' transfer across the universe. It must be understood however that instantaneous happenings have absolutely no regard for 'size', only we humans do. If there are instantaneous force transferences within nucleons due to deep quark inelasticity then it can logically (rather than emotively) be the case that instantaneous transferences should be possible over any distance*. In any case my previous explanation of the eos should suffice to show that potentially instantaneous universal scattering only usually travels infinitesimal distances. This then promotes dimensional but not relativistic frames of reference and the energy transfer then may be reckoned to actually occur at velocity 'y'. Note: Subjective rationale is in the eye of the beholder, while logical fact is in the eye of the scientific consensus. The truth is that which demonstrates a homology.

*Refer to the definitions of entanglement and interlocution.

 

Semiconductor behavior is a well known science and will not be addressed because that arm of ED already assumes particle involvement.