A Bridge between Classical and Modern Physics


|  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


                              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

                                              [email protected]

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).


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.,


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.


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


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.


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


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,


     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).


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


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


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.


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


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 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


     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.


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


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.


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



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,


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,


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


       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


       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


       “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


       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


       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