<!–StartFragment–>______________________________________________________________________________
| File Name : REYNOLD2.ASC | Online Date : 01/02/95 |
| Contributed by : Glenda Stocks | Dir Category : ENERGY |
| From : KeelyNet BBS | DataLine : (214) 324-3501 |
| KeelyNet * PO BOX 870716 * Mesquite, Texas * USA * 75187 |
| A FREE Alternative Sciences BBS sponsored by Vanguard Sciences |
|—————————————————————————-|
The EXCELLENT Reynolds files are listed on KeelyNet as:
REYNOLDS1.ASC – Aether as a crystalline dilatant matrix to help
explain matter, energy, space, time and PSI pheomena
REYNOLDS2.ASC – the dilatant medium hypothesis as a bridge between
classical and modern physics
REYNOLDS3.ASC – envisions dynamic systems of negative dislocations
(holes) through which matter and energy manifest and
moves with tie-ins to explain UFOs
REYNOLDS.ZIP – All of the above files as bundled together
Also, you should download BUBBLE1.ZIP as explaining matter as a bubble in the
aether density.
——————————————————————————
Osborne Reynolds’ Submechanics of the Universe:
A Bridge between Classical and Modern Physics
BY
Bruce L. Rosenberg
Submitted for Presentation at the
Joint Anglo-American Conference on the History of Science
held at the University of Manchester
Manchester, England
11th to 14th of July 1988
May 25, 1988
23 North Chelsea Avenue
Atlantic City
New Jersey, 08401 USA
(609) 345-4712
cserve 73547,402
Copyright (C) 1988 by Bruce L. Rosenberg, All Rights Reserved.
Osborne Reynolds’ Submechanics of the Universe:
A Bridge between Classical and Modern Physics
“By this research it is shown that there is one, and only one,
conceivable purely mechanical system capable of accounting for all
the physical evidence, as we know it in the Universe.
The system is neither more nor less than an arrangement, of
indefinite extent, of uniform spherical grains generally in normal
piling so close that the grains cannot change their neighbors,
although continually in relative motion with each other; the
grains being of changeless shape and size; thus constituting, to a
first approximation, an elastic medium with six axes of elasticity
symmetrically placed.”, Osborne Reynolds (1, p. 1).
Thus begins one of the most revolutionary achievements in the history of
science. Osborne Reynolds, F.R.S. (1842-1912), a British engineer and
educator, earned the respect of his peers and the devotion of his students.
Today he is recognized mainly for his contributions to the study of fluid
dynamics, turbulence, and tribology (2,3); but Reynolds perceived these as
only preliminaries to his grand synthesis – an axiomatic theory of a
particulate aether. The prevailing view today is that Reynolds’
quasicrystalline medium is an antiquated curiosity, an interesting exercise
which was overtaken by events of the time.
My position is that Reynolds’ “Sub-Mechanics of the Universe” (henceforth,
SMU) is a bridge between classical and modern physics; that it is consistent
with relativity and quantum theory; and that it provides a solid foundation
for the Theory Of Everything. I believe that if scientists can shift their
paradigms to incorporate Reynolds’ SMU model, a new age of enlightenment in
physics will be upon us. I will elaborate upon my reasons, but first let me
give you some of my background.
In 1968 while employed as a research engineer at the Franklin Institute
Research Laboratories in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA, I invented a device
which consisted of a dilatant fluid enclosed and sealed in a rubber sack. At
the time I had no idea what dilatancy was, so I asked some of my associates in
the physics department, got the basic vocabulary and set off to the Franklin
Institute Library to do some research. This was the beginning of my education
in rheology and the work of Osborne Reynolds. Also in 1968, totally unknown
to me, the Osborne Reynolds Centennial Celebration was being conducted at the
University of Manchester.
Whilst researching the prior art in dilatancy, I was surprised and intrigued
to find, in a book on rheology (4, p. 4), that Osborne Reynolds’ had based an
entire theory of the universe on a dilatant medium. I contqnued to pursue my
applications and subsequently received a patent on a toy (5) and later,
through the US Navy, I was granted a patent on an impa{t absorber based on the
same principle (6). The rheologically dilatant suspension used in my patents
has a critical shear rate which can be kinaesthetically perceived on handling
it. Below a critical shear rate it behaves as a liquid, above this rate it
behaves as a solid. There seemed to be some analogy between this critical
flow rate and relativistic phenomena at the speed of light.
As an amateur physicist, I was thus fascinated with Reynolds’ SMU model and
continued to study it and related topics over the past twenty years.
Throughout my research on Reynolds I could never understand the obscurity into
which his Sub-Mechanics of the Universe sank. I expected it to be treated in
Whittaker’s momentous work, “A History of the Theo, got the basic vocabulary and set off to the Franklin Institute
Library to do some research. This was the beginning of my education in
rheology and the work of Osborne Reynolds.
While researching the prior art in dilatancy, I was surprised and intrigued to
find, in a book on RHEOLOGY (3, p. 4), that Osborne Reynolds’ had based an
entire theory of the universe on a DILATANT medium. I continued to pursue my
applications and subsequently received a patent on a toy called the
“Wackysack(R)” (4). Later, through the US Navy, I was granted a patent on an
impact absorber based on the same principle (5).
The rheologically dilatant suspension used in my patents has a critical shear
rate which can be kinaesthetically perceived on handling it. Below a critical
shear rate it behaves as a liquid, above this rate it behaves as a solid.
There seemed to be some analogy between this critical flow rate and
relativistic phenomena at the speed of light.
As an amateur physicist, I was thus fascinated with Reynolds’ SMU model and
continued to study it and related topics over the past twenty years. I have
written two papers on the topic. The first deals with the theory in relation
to UFOs (6) and the second with a historical perspective on the theory (7).
DILATANCY OF BEACH SAND, GROUND COFFEE, AND GRAVITY
Reynolds’ first aether-related works (8 and 9) appeared 18 years before
publication of his magnum opus. They describe a previously undiscovered
phenomenon; which Reynolds called “dilatancy”.
Dilatancy refers to the shear-induced expansion of a mass of solid particles.
Reynolds’ used dilatancy to explain the curious behavior of beach sand.
Walking on the beach is easy on the wet sand near the water, but difficult in
dry sand. When walking on wet beach sand, each time a heel strikes the
surface, the area surrounding the impact appears to turn dry or white. This
dry area appears to propagate from the point of impact like some sort of
field. According to Reynolds (2), it is in many ways analogous to a
gravitational field.
When a close-packed mass of sand is subjected to a deforming force, the
particles attempt to slide past one another. This results in an expansion or
dilation of the deformed volume. The action of expansion or dilation can be
understood by making two fists, holding them in front of you and placing the
knuckles of one fist into the spaces between the knuckles of the other fist.
Your knuckles should now be “geared” to each other with the open spaces
(interstices) at a minimum. Now, if one set of knuckles is moved up or down
relative to the other, a point of maximum open “packing” is reached then the
top of one knuckle is directly on top of another. This represents the maximum
expansion or dilation of the volume containing the sheared “particles”, i. e.,
knuckles.
In sand, for the sheared volume to expand, water must flow in to fill the
interstices. The sheared portion of sand underfoot therefore sucks water away
from the surrounding mass of wet sand and its surface turns white or dry.
This gearing action is responsible for the strength of the sand and also for
the rigidity of bricks of coffee packaged in flexible plastic foil bags.
Once the vacuum is broken, particles of coffee are no longer compressed or
interlocked and the brick becomes a floppy bag. Once the water is gone from
between the sand grains, the once solid surface becomes a soft, leg-tiring
treadmill. Although dilatancy is the key element in the SMU theory, there is
more to it than dilatancy.
DETAILED EXPLANATION OF REYNOLDS’ THEORY
Reynolds’ medium is granular, composed of uniform, independent, spherical
grains much smaller than subatomic particles and filling the entire universe.
In fact, it is the universe.
In matter-free space the grains are hexagonally arrayed and almost touching
(close-packed). Because they cannot normally exchange neighbors, they form a
quasicrystalline matrix. The grains are in relative, vibratory, gas-like
motion; but with a mean free path many orders of magnitude smaller than the
diameter of the grains (unlike a gas).
This jostling of the grains against one another produces a very high pressure
in the medium. Because of the gearing of the grains and the pressure, the
medium supports transverse disturbances (light waves) whose local propagation
rate depends on the local pressure and strains in the medium.
Reynolds says matter is strained regions of misalignment of the grains or
“singular surfaces”, “negative inequalities”, or simply, “holes”. Elementary
particles are stable, dynamic configurations of holes; of places where the
aether grains are missing from the quasicrystalline matrix.
Matter, then, moves by means of displacement; much as a bubble moves upward by
an equal amount of liquid being displaced downward. For holes to move through
the medium, aether grains must move in the opposite direction.
Disturbances are propagated by the aether grains instantaneously transferring
their momentum by means of perfectly elastic collisions among them. It must
be emphasized that the hypothetical aether grains are idealized and must not
be thought of as ordinary matter.
The presence of holes in granular medium causes a reduction in the local
aether pressure. This reduction in pressure corresponds to gravitational and
inertial effects of matter. It is an inward, centrally acting strain gradient
in the medium. Two pieces of matter move toward each other because the aether
between them tends to move away at right angles from a line connecting them.
Said differently, matter tends to move toward regions of lower aether pressure
due to the higher pressure of the surrounding aether.
In explaining gravitation with the SMU model, Reynolds writes (1, p. 3):
“Efforts, proportional to the inverse square of the distance, to
cause two negative inequalities to approach are the result of
those components of the dilatation (taken at first approximation
only) which are caused by the variation of those components of the
inward strain which cause curvature in the normal piling of the
medium. The other components of the strain being parallel,
distortions which satisfy the condition of geometrical similarity
do not affect the effort. If the grains were indefinitely small,
there would be no effort. Thus the diameter of a grain is the
parameter of the effort; and multiplying this diameter by the
curvature of the medium (underlining by B.R.) and again by the
mean pressure of the medium the product measures the intensity of
the effort.
The dilation diminishes as the centers of the negative
inequalities approach, and work is done BY THE PRESSURE IN THE
MEDIUM, outside the singular surfaces, to bring the negative
inequalities together.
The efforts to cause the negative inequalities to approach
correspond, exactly, to gravitation, if matter represents negative
mass.”
Reynolds then shows the calculation which results in the model’s correct
prediction of gravitational force at the surface of the earth, concluding:
“The inversion is thus complete. Matter is an absence of mass,
and the effort to bring the negative inequalities together is also
an effort on the mass (aether grain mass, that is, B.R.) to
recede. And since the actions are those of positive pressure there
is no attraction involved; the efforts being the result of the
virtual diminution of the pressure inwards.”
As underlined above, Reynolds spoke of gravitational curvature of space more
than a decade before Einstein’s general theory of relativity was published.
HOW MATTER MOVES FREELY THROUGH REYNOLDS’ MEDIUM AND VICE VERSA
Reynolds’ theory differs greatly from aether theories based on the solid-
elastic continuum model. Two requirements for the solid-elastic medium are:
1) to be stiff enough to transmit the extremely high frequency vibrations
of light on the one hand, yet
2) diaphanous enough to permit the unhindered movement of the heavenly
bodies.
According to Reynolds’ his SMU model avoids these paradoxical requirements (1,
p. 250):
“The difficulties in conceiving the free motion of the ether
through matter do not present themselves in the analysis of the
properties of the granular medium as now accomplished. This
follows from the analysis which has been effected in this and the
previous section.”
“… Whence it follows that the singular surfaces which correspond
to matter are free to move in any direction through the medium
without resistance, and vice versa the medium is free to move in
any direction through the singular surfaces without resistance.
And that the waves corresponding to those of light are instituted
and absorbed by the singular surfaces only. So that after
institution at the place where the singular surfaces are, the
motion of the waves depends solely on the mean motion of the
medium, and the rate of propagation is equal in all directions
until they again come to singular surfaces. Thus all paradox is
removed and the explanation of aberration is established on the
basis of the absence of any appreciable resistance to the medium
in passing through matter.”
Thus besides the explanations by definite analysis of:
the potential energy,
the propagation of transverse waves of light,
the apparent absence of any rate of degradation of light,
the lack of evidence of normal waves,
the gravitation of matter,
electricity,
which explanations render the purely mechanical substructure of
the universe indefinitely probable, we have by further analyses
obtained …”
Reynolds’ theory is compatible with both relativity and quantum theories. It
is an aether which was not demolished by the Michelson-Morley (M-M)
experimental results. It is true that M-M results disproved some aether
theories; but far from being disproven, I have actually been able to show that
the mechanism whereby relativistic phenomena occur is inherent in the very
structure and dynamics of Reynolds’ medium itself (6 and 7).
MODERN PHYSICS AND REYNOLDS’ THEORY
Some modern theoretical physicists, notably Bohm (10), de Broglie and Vigier
(11) and Hiley (12), have postulated the existence of a subquantic medium,
which according to Bohm’s early interpretation, is surprisingly similar to
Reynolds’ quasicrystalline dilatant medium. Both theories envision a
structured matrix with a graininess much finer than the smallest subatomic
particle.
In Bohm’s subquantic medium, elementary particles are analogous to
dislocations and disclinations in a crystalline matrix. That is, there are a
sufficient number of different types of dislocations and disclinations in
crystals to account for the number of types of known elementary particles.
The stress fields in the crystal are analogous to the electric, magnetic,
nuclear, or gravitational forces exerted by the particle. The particle cannot
exist without the stress fields nor the stress fields without the particle.
Frank (13, pp. 131-134) has shown in a theoretical analysis that a Burgers
screw dislocation moving through a crystal experiences relativistic effects,
which can be determined by substituting the transverse velocity of sound in
the crystal for the speed of light. Thus, there is a modern trend moving in
the direction of Reynolds’ theory.
Moving, propagating dislocations have much in common with the objects in John
Conway’s game of Life. The objects in the game of Life are called “cellular
automata”. It’s not really a game, it’s more a self-running demonstration or
simulation usually played out on the screens of personal computers. Certain
rules are set up on a computer, an initial configuration is input, and the
action is begun on the playing field.
Stable and oscillating immobile entities arise and some rarer moving entities,
called gliders and boats also appear on the field as the configuration
evolves. Certain starting configurations called “glider guns” are immobile
oscillators which every so many cycles shoot out a glider onto the field.
Although much simpler, in some respect Conway’s 2 dimensional objects are
analogous to elementary particles in Reynolds’ aether. In both cases, from a
set of relatively simple initial assumptions and generating rules, an entire
universe is constructed.
Le Corbeiller (14, p. 881) believes that, in light of the 32 possible crystal
classes and the 230 possible types of space arrangements of atoms in a
crystal, “It may not be very long before we obtain deductive knowledge, on the
basis of some few fundamental assumptions, of the main features of the
physical universe.”
A proposal that one might deduce definable, mechanical structures for
elementary particles on a subquantic scale should cause Heisenberg to spin in
his grave. Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle sets limits to certain kinds of
knowledge. It is a fuzzy electron which is measured by photons. It is a
fuzzy airplane which is measured by radar pulses. For certain purposes an
airplane is a “probability cloud” existing somewhere within a trumpet-shaped
volume of sky. However, this does not eliminate the fact that an airplane is
a complex mechanical structure, about which the crude radar pulses can tell us
very little. Deductive approaches such as Reynolds’ theory just might let us
determine HOW AN ELECTRON IS BUILT OUT OF AETHER GRAINS.
One of the advantages of Reynolds’ theory is that it makes possible
visualization of phenomena, which formerly were grasped mainly by mathematical
relationships. “Don’t try to picture it; the equation is the whole reality”,
is a point of view which promulgates mystery in physics. Reynolds’ theory has
the potential of demystifying physics and bringing to bear, once again, that
powerful human faculty of visualization to the subject.
In this theory, the pressure of the aether, the interlocking structure of the
aether grains, and dilation effects resulting from strains in the medium are
the first order effects. The aether grains are the only truly 3 dimensional
objects. All of the known physical phenomena are higher order effects
deriving from these first order effects. Reynolds’ quasicrystalline,
dilatant, subquantic medium can provide explanations for:
1. the mechanism of gravity,
2. the magnitudes of nuclear, electric/magnetic, and
gravitational forces as a function of distance,
3. the constant velocity of light,
4. the Lorentz-Fitzgerald contraction,
5. time expansion,
6. increase in mass with velocity,
7. nonradiating orbits of electrons around the nucleus,
8. the Pauli exclusion principle,
9. mass-energy interconversion (pair production and electron-
positron annihilation),
10. the equivalence of gravitational and inertial mass, and
11. the wave-particle duality of EM radiation.
SPECULATIONS ON RELEVANCE OF REYNOLDS’ THEORY TO PARAPSYCHOLOGY
Douglas Stokes in his fine review article “Theoretical Parapsychology” (15)
mentions resonance theories, Sheldrake’s morphogenetic fields and Bohm’s
implicate order as possible explanations for parapsychological phenomena.
Helmholtz demonstrated electromagnetic resonance by building identical, open
loops of wire and when these were in proper orientation to each other a spark
across the gap in the sender also occurred in the receiver. In some manner
the energy was transmitted across the space between them. We now know that
the transverse waves of electromagnetic radiation traveling through space at
the speed of light are the basis for what Helmholtz observed.
Are mental sparks transmitted from person to person? If so, what is the
nature of these mental sparks? What is the medium across which this occurs?
What might be resonating? The Ganzfeld phenomena, remote-viewing would appear
to involve a much more complex sort of transmission than transverse EM
radiation.
Osborne Reynolds’ longitudinal (or compression-rarefaction) waves are one
candidate. These travel at 2.4 times the speed of light, however they
interact very little with matter and have a relatively limited range of a few
thousand meters.
Another candidate for psi transmission lies in the structural properties of
Reynolds’ aether. Reynolds defines matter as regions of space within which
aether grains ARE MISSING from the normal packing. This produces an AETHER
PRESSURE DIFFERENTIAL which, basically, is a gravitational field.
This field produced by a physical object persists so long as that object
exists. The field extends indefinitely into space and its intensity falls off
according to the square of the distance. Along with the amorphous, purely
quantitative gravitational field, it may be possible that objects produce a
structured field containing more information than simply the amount of mass
contained therein, which I will call “corporeal fields”.
Interactions of these corporeal fields extending into space might provide a
physical basis for some classes of psi phenomena. Such “transcorporeal
resonances” might produce subliminal or liminal experiences on a physical,
tactile, body sensation level. It is not easy for many (especially the males
in our culture) to be aware of, to be sensitive to, bodily sensations and
“feelings”. Individual differences in corporeal sensitivity could account for
differences in psychic abilities.
The information in a corporeal field might be more than simply the physical
configuration of a human body; it could include thoughts, sensations,
feelings, and mental images. Perhaps Jung’s archetypes are modes of
transcorporeal resonances and the universal unconscious is a name for this
corporeal field information being shared via Reynolds quasicrystalline aether.
I want to emphasize the difference between the above view and that of one
person sending “thought waves” to another. The corporeal fields of all of us
exist throughout the aether. Our corporeal fields in this room are coexisting
and interpenetrating via the structured aether.
Our bodies are the major source of these informational fields. Our bodies are
separated by skin, clothing and air from other bodies in this room but we are
intimately connected via the aether which provides the medium within which our
bodies (and the rest of the universe) exists. Subtle features of the field
could enable resonances or interactions among them which would be detectable
at the source. So, I am talking about corporeal fields exchanging
configurational information rather than transmission of messages through
modulated electromagnetic radiation.
THE FUTURE OF PHYSICS AND REYNOLDS’ THEORY
The first three decades of the twentieth century were rich with theoretical
advances in physics. Since that time, technology has developed the practical
applications of these new theories. It seems that the lands charted by these
theories have all been explored and cultivated. There remain few new vistas.
Reynolds’ theory offers a new perspective, a revitalized vision of the
physical world, a new mastery over the physical universe. It allows for the
possibility of:
1. signal propagation at 2.4 times the speed of light,
2. control of gravity or levitation of physical objects,
3. control of the inertia or mass of physical objects,
4. control of the rate of passage of time within a volume of
space,
5. control of the local metric of space,
6. a space drive not requiring the expulsion of reaction mass,
7. an inexhaustible source of energy, and
8. a physical basis for understanding psi phenomena.
Considerable theoretical and applied research will be necessary to realize any
of these possibilities. But just knowing that they exist will be enough to
infuse new vitality into not only our physics; but also our entire
civilization. Osborne Reynolds’ quasicrystalline dilatant aether theory is a
paradigm upon which a new physics for the third millennium may be built.
METAPHYSICAL IMPLICATIONS: A PERSONAL PHILOSOPHY
Reynolds’ interlocking aether grains provide a basis for long range order and
structure in the universe. Macroscopic structure in past theories was based
on molecular configurations and arose from the electromagnetic interactions
among atoms by means of photon interchanges between electron orbitals.
With the SMU these interactions themselves are based on a structured medium.
Structure is no longer an accident, but is innate in the very ground of
existence. Instead of an amorphous empty space we have a highly structured
matrix of high energy and high information content. Instead of particles
having an independent existence, we have a total embedment and
interrelatedness.
The medium is inside of and outside of all things. The medium is all things.
Without it, nothing exists. All matter exists as dislocations in a
structured, mechanical medium. All interactions between matter occur through
vibrations and stresses in this structured medium. Suddenly, with Reynolds’
Theory, we have a cozier universe.
For me, finding such an explanatory paradigm has changed my life. I’m
basically a simple person. I like to be able to visualize things. This is why
a mechanical medium appeals to me. When I say mechanical, it is important to
keep in mind that although Reynolds’ medium allows for the existence of
matter, it itself is not ordinary matter. It has negative mass, perfect
elasticity and other characteristics that everyday matter does not possess.
Perhaps lifeforms have found ways of using this structured medium to enhance
their survival potential.
ATMAN IS BRAHMAN, BRAHMAN IS ATMAN
This means: “The individual spirit is the universal spirit, the universal
spirit is the individual spirit.” What this means to me on a more personal
level is that there is a unity behind the diversity of experience, the
connectedness of all things, is given substance with Reynolds subquantic,
interstellar medium.
The metaphysical implication of Osborne Reynolds’ subquantic medium is that it
is a universal matrix within which all things exist, out of which all things
appear or emerge and into which all things dissolve or fade away. To use Bohm
and Peat’s terminology (16) it is the ultimate implicate order from which the
explicate order unfolds.
The words “mother”, “mater”, “matrix”, “hugging”, “oneness”, “enfoldment”,
“embedment” I see as descriptive of Osborne Reynolds’ medium and the universe.
A Universal Matrix can be considered the Universal Mater or Mother. I see a
fundamental relationship between the East’s “unseen ground of existence” and
Reynolds’ medium, which provides the implicate order, the “active
intelligence”, the subtle guidance which is necessary to explain hitherto
unexplained physical phenomena.
As we move through the experience of life, from embedment in the womb, to
embedment in the family, to embedment in the larger world of school and work,
it is conceptually satisfying to see everything within which all this took
place as itself embedded in the universal, subquantic, interstellar medium.
This understanding at the highest theoretical, intellectual level of a
graspable, visualizable grand unifying theory of everything has provided me
with a … not really faith … how can I put it, has set my mind to rest.
The subjective experience of oneness, of me, as the unifying principle of my
personal universe has a theoretical correlate in Reynolds’ medium as the
unifying principle of the physical universe. It now all makes sense, it
coheres, it is aesthetically satisfying.
Our physical bodies are conceived, born, grow, age, die and disperse. Each of
us is a physical entity — yet there is more than just these bodies. There
is awareness, sensitivity to people and the world around us. There is the
struggle for understanding of ourselves and our universe, the ultimate
refinement of the struggle for survival, which I see as our springboard to
immortality.
REFERENCES
1. Reynolds, 0., Papers on Mechanical and Physical Subjects, Vol. III, The
Sub-Mechanics of the Universe, Cambridge: at the University Press, 1903.
2. Reynolds, 0., On an Inversion of Ideas as to the Structure of the
Universe (The Rede Lecture, June 10, 1902), Cambridge: at the University
Press, 1903.
3. Blair, G. W. S., A Survey of General and Applied Rheology, Pitman
Publishing Corp, 1944.
4. Rosenberg, B. L., Amusement Device Employing Dilatant Suspension Filler,
U.S. Patent 3,601,923 granted 31 Aug. 1971, filed 7 Oct. 1968.
5. Rosenberg, B. L., Non Linear Energy Absorption System U.S. Patent No.
3,833,952, Granted 10 Sept 1974, filed 18 Jan 1973, assigned to the
U.S.A. as represented by the Secretary of the Navy.
6. Rosenberg, B. L., UFOs, Osborne Reynolds and the One Wind: A New Look at
an Old Theory, Submitted as an entry in the Cutty Sark scientific paper
competition to promote understanding of the UFO phenomenon, Atlantic
City, NJ, June 1979.
7. Rosenberg, B. L., Osborne Reynolds’ Submechanics of the Universe: A
Bridge between Classical and Modern Physics, Submitted to the Joint
Anglo-American Conference on the History of Science, Manchester, England,
July 1988.
8. Reynolds, O. “Experiments Showing Dilatancy, A Property of Granular
Material, Possibly Connected with Gravitation”. Proceedings of the Royal
Institution of Great Britain, Read February 12, 1886, Reprinted in Papers
on Mechanical and Physical Subjects, Reprinted from Various Transactions
and Journals, Vol. II: 1881 – 1900, Cambridge: at the University Press,
1901.
9. Reynolds, 0., “On the Dilatancy of Media Composed of Rigid Particles in
Contact, With Experimental Illustrations”, Philosophical Mag., 20 (S5),
469-481, Dec. 1885.
10. Bohm, D. J., “Problems in the Basic Concepts of Physics”, Satyendranath
Bose 70th Birthday Commemoration Volume, Part II, Kalipada Mukherjee at
Eka Press, Calcutta, 1966.
11. de Broglie, L. and Vigier, J. P., Introduction to the Vigier Theory of
Elementary Particles, Elsevier Publishing Co., 1963.
12. Hiley, B. J., “A Note on Discreteness, Phase Space and Cohomology
Theory”, in Quantum Theory and Beyond: Essays and Discussions Arising
from a Colloquium, Ted Bastian, Ed., Cambridge: at the University Press,
1971.
13. Frank, F. C., “On the Equations of Motion of Crystal Dislocations”, in
The Proceedings of the Physical Society, Sec. A, from Jan. 1949 to Dec.
1949, Vol. 62.
14. Le Corbeiller, P. “Crystals and the Future of Physics”, in The World of
Mathematics, Volume Two, pp. 871-881, James R. Newman, ed., Simon and
Schuster, New York, 1956.
15. Stokes, D. M. “Theoretical Parapsychology” in Advances In
Parapsychological Research, pp. 77-189, Stanley Krippner, ed., McFarland
and Company, 1987.
16. Bohm, D. and Peat, F. D., Science, Order, and Creativity, Bantam Books,
November, 1987.
——————————————————————————
earden to explain
polarization in terms of his longitudinal model.
Evidently I pissed him off.
He told me that I was just regurgitating what “they” had taught me
in the standard electromagnetics courses. That I shouldn’t believe
them. That I should read and re-read his books to get straightened
out on these points.
I felt he was evading my question. I was asking about polarization.
If he didn’t know the answer, or if he hadn’t considered the
question before, or even if he didn’t feel like talking to me about
it, he could have politely told me so. I would have accepted that.
Everyone who has a theory is allowed to develop it. Rome wasn’t
built in a day.
Next, Tom Bearden was attempting to tell me that polarization itself
was “a bunch of bullshit”! Trying to get a word in edgewise, while
trying to remain polite (after all, I was making the phone call,
intruding on his time), I reminded him that his books didn’t DEAL
with polarization. He said he didn’t HAVE to, because it was all
Page 10
bullshit. That I needed to THINK (emphasis his), and that if I were
really paying attention to what he was saying, I would understand
and wouldn’t be asking these ILLOGICAL questions!
Still hearing no attempt to answer my question about polarization, I
tried to define what I meant by it. I tried to use the illustration
of a TV station, whose antenna is usually horizontally polarized —
and thus your home TV antenna on your roof is also horizontally
polarized.
But Bearden doesn’t let you finish most of your sentences. Instead,
he is parroting more phrases such as you find throughout his books.
By this point, he was actually telling me that, sorry, but when a
caller such as myself constantly repeats the same question over and
over, or from a different angle, then he must get tough with the
caller and tell him point blank that his questions are bullshit
questions. And that I was ‘not going to get him to ADMIT’ to there
being such a thing as wave polarization, as if doing so was to
‘surrender’ to those people who hold to the Transverse EM wave
theory. God forbid!
Now I was beginning to wonder if this guy was paranoid. I thought
of ufologist Jacques Vallee who would try and try to ask simple,
polite but firm questions of people like Bill Cooper or Bob Lazar.
When they would begin to squirm, he would press them just a little
bit more. Not to be an S.O.B., just to cut through the fluff and
get to see if there was really anything to the whole thing. Vallee
recounts how he would sometimes be accused, afterwards, of working
for the CIA or some other “government” group hated by the UFO ‘true
believers’.
So now, here I was, being informed by Tom Bearden that I was
attempting to get him to ‘admit’ to a ‘doctrine’ of classical EM,
which he would not. I was a Roman Catholic Inquisitor trying to get
Galileo to recant his position and admit that the heavens do revolve
around a stationary earth. Oy vay!
Feeling exasperated, I paused for a moment. Bearden paused, too. I
then said, “Mr. Bearden, I am not trying to get you to ‘admit’
anything. I’m just trying to understand how to fit polarization
into your longitudinal view…”
“It’s NOT just my view. Nikola Tesla himself held to ‘sound waves’
in the ether…”
“I didn’t mean that it was just YOUR view, Mr. Bearden…”
“It is the CORRECT view…”
Now I was thinking of my boss at work. He never lets me finish what
I’m saying, either.
Finally I asked him, “Mr. Bearden, may I make a REQUEST of you then?
In your future writings, would you please at least ADDRESS this
problem of how polarization is explained in the longitudinal
model…”
“No I will NOT!” Bearden said with some conviction. “I get letters
Page 11
all the time from people with fifty questions and who want all their
questions answered…”
I interrupted HIM this time: “Yes, and when you go public as you
have and write books that challenge the present ‘system ‘, and
encourage a new generation of bright young physicists to embrace
this Scalar EM and thereby “overturn the present Physics”, YOU HAD
BETTER EXPECT TO ANSWER SOME QUESTIONS TO BACK UP YOUR ASSERTIONS
when people call or write, asking for more detail…”
He told me once more to read his books again, because he would not
answer anyone’s questions if (like mine) they were repetitions of an
ILLOGICAL question to begin with.
There was no more to be gained by pressing this conversation. I
said, with a sigh, “Thank you for your help, Mr. Bearden”, and hung
up the phone.
Obviously, I won’t be ‘pestering’ the honorable Mr. Tom Bearden with
my silly phone calls again, unless he decides to lower himself down
to my humble intellectual level and, in his great mercy, throw me
but a crumb from the table on which sits the bounteous feast of
Beardenian Electromagnetics.
I guess since I’m not a member of the Mensa Society, as Bearden is,
I can only be classified as lower than a “degenerate semiconductor”.
I suppose it’s the slow “drift velocity” at which knowledge
propagates through the electron gas in my cerebral cortex. And it
keeps precessing sideways, instead of sinking in.
Anyway, Be it known both to Mr. Tom Bearden and to you, good reader,
that I hold nothing against Bearden personally. The man definitely
seems to be a genius in many ways, even if his table manners could
use some polishing up.
I believe he is on to something real and with big consequences for
21st Century Physics, once we take up his challenge to test his
theories in the lab. Just don’t call him up with any questions that
tend to rock his boat, or you may be branded “illogical”. He is a
rugged Pioneer; we ‘young-uns’ are going to have to be the ones who
bring methodical, point-by-point analysis and proof to bear on this
Scalar Electromagnetics.
Pioneers are lone trail-blazers who have had to fight off the
establishment for all of their pioneering careers, and they’ve got
to be committed to their cause, even to the point of religious
dogmatism. The upside of this is that lesser souls have a shining
light to follow. The down-side is that the pioneer creates a dogma
that rivals the one he broke away from and made a career of
criticizing. It’s human nature, I guess.
It seems to me that, even if Bearden (and, yes, Tesla also) is wrong
on the mode of propagation– if EM does have transverse components
through the vacuum, and not solely longitudinal– most of his other
gripes with classical EM have the solid support of Quantum Physics
behind them and show the classical EM model to be useful, yet quite
wrong in many of its fundamentals.
In the meantime I want to remind those of you who, like me, think
Page 12
that Bearden is mostly correct and that the scientific community
needs to re-examine the foundations of Electromagnetics: This
“copping an attitude” bullshit as exhibited by Tom Bearden just
won’t wash with the real world. We need to come up with an
electromagnetic theory that properly explains empirical
observations, such as the phenomenon of wave polarization. As of
this writing, April 1993, the Transverse Wave model of Maxwell’s
Electromagnetics continues to be the best explanation of wave
polarization. I was hoping to find out that Bearden’s EM theory
explains it better; unfortunately, he refuses to discuss it at all.
This is kid stuff and has no place in a respectable scientific
theory. As long as honest inquirers keep getting rebuffed the way I
did by Bearden, he cannot expect to be taken seriously by anyone.
Can anyone explain wave polarization via Tom Bearden’s Scalar EM
theory?
I welcome correspondence on this and related subjects. I also
promise to treat you politely! My address is:
——————————————————————–
Rick Andersen
RD1 Box 50A
Newport, PA 17074
Aside from the many files by Tom Bearden available for download from
the BBS’s, his books are sold through:
Tesla Book Company
P.O. Box 121875
Chula Vista, CA 91912
—————————- End of file —————————
If you have comments or other information relating to such topics
as this paper covers, please upload to KeelyNet or send to the
Vangard Sciences address as listed on the first page.
Thank you for your consideration, interest and support.
Jerry W. Decker………Ron Barker………..Chuck Henderson
Vangard Sciences/KeelyNet
——————————————————————–
If we can be of service, you may contact
Jerry at (214) 324-8741 or Ron at (214) 242-9346
UFO and Alien Section – Oct 10, 2003, 07:36
Why the Government Wont Tell
UFO and Alien Section – Oct 10, 2003, 07:34
A list of UFO Accounts
UFO and Alien Section – Oct 10, 2003, 07:31
The Unidentified Flying Objects Book
UFO and Alien Section – Oct 10, 2003, 07:29
Alien Laws, Legal UFO Regulations, NO Alien Contact
UFO and Alien Section – Oct 10, 2003, 07:25
UFO Organizations, Cases, and Giant 67 page Summary
UFO and Alien Section – Oct 10, 2003, 07:24
Adam and Eve And Aliens
UFO and Alien Section – Oct 10, 2003, 07:22
Alien Bodies Recovered
UFO and Alien Section – Oct 10, 2003, 07:20
Abduction Documents
UFO and Alien Section – Oct 10, 2003, 07:18
UFO Abduction Report