Modern physics describes electrons and protons as particles, but it does not stop there. Physicists also describe force carriers as particles, and identify a host of particles that remain undetected such as axions, photinos, selectrons, and gravitinos[1]. Supposedly, the strong force is due to the exchange of particles. The photon designates a particle. The neutrino is a particle. Everything is a particle. It is as though the makers of Legos[2] developed modern physics.

The addition of all these particles has helped in one respect: it seems to be giving us an understanding of renormalization. For years scientists have been getting around the difficulties of infinities in their theories by subtracting them out—in essence, by sweeping them under the rug. The method they used worked, but they were not quite sure why. With supergravity it seems as if we may be able to get around renormalization. Crudely speaking, it turns out that for each infinity in the theory that is caused by a boson there is an infinity of the opposite sign caused by a fermion, and they cancel one another.

Despite the promise of explaining renormalization, the theory does have difficulties. The major one is all the particles that are predicted by it—selectrons, winos, and so on. They have never been found in nature. Scientists, however, have an argument for this: They say that they might have been generated with so much mass that we have not yet been able to observe them. But when we get larger accelerators we will be able to.[3]

In the Aether Physics Model, primary angular momentum is the absolute primary unit of matter. Yes, we can shatter the primary angular momentum of protons and neutrons and we can observe that the dying onta fall apart in regular patterns and these ephemeral pieces can designate as quarks, for whatever it is worth. And just for amusement, one can label characteristics of the quarks as colors, flavors, and up/down. However, when we understand the living nature of Aether, we find that particle smashing is neither instructive nor amusing.

Primary angular momentum absorbs into the Aether via the Casimir effect (page 213). It appears to draw from a huge sea of primary angular momentum (dark matter), which coexists with quantum Aether units. The so-called “Big Bang” appears to be nothing more than the continual appearance of Aether units, into which a quantity of dark matter flows. The Aether units themselves have a non-material origin.

Imagine the Aether units as measuring cups, and imagine angular momentum as something measured. The dynamic Aether unit can hold a specific measure of angular momentum in each of its four spin positions.

The angular momentum itself appears to be a specific mass that sweeps an area in a quantum time. Essentially, there are only two stable mass quantities existing in the normal portion of the Universe, those of the electron and those of the proton. These two mass values are very specific and are unchanging. But why are these masses what they are? Is there some kind of logical order underlying the proton to electron mass ratio?

The onta gap number is a potential clue, which may or may not actually quantify the proton to electron mass ratio (also the anti-proton to positron ratio). The onta gap number seems to predict the ratio of the proton to electron mass to within .00035% accuracy. This may seem like a good bet at first, but the masses of the electron and proton claim to be far more accurate according to scientific standards. So the onta gap number introduces for now as a curiosity.

\[\frac{{{2^5}{\pi ^3}{{\left( {\frac{{\sqrt 5 + 1}}{2}} \right)}^2}}}{{\sqrt 2 }} = 1.83679157 \times {10^3} \tag{8.1}\]

We have already seen how \(Phi\) seems to relate to the onta g-factors (page 170). Equation (8.1) seems to show that the proportion of \(Phi\) squared is involved in the ratio of proton to electron mass. Perhaps the g-factors and mass ratios are related in geometry and proportion?

The Aether constant of \(16{\pi ^2}\) notates as \({2^4}{\pi ^2}\). The constant \({2^5}{\pi ^3}\) could be a further progression in the geometrical constants (page 281) that leads to a “higher” level of existence. Whatever it was that caused mass to appear as a dual quantum in the Aether, it may exist with a geometry represented by \({2^5}{\pi ^3}\). The \({\sqrt 2 }\) may in some way represent the orthogonality of the masses. There may be nothing to the onta gap number, or it may be a clue. It is speculation at this point.

Whatever may be the causes of mass and the Aether units, there are only four spin positions in the Aether that primary angular momentum can occupy in forward time direction. Only two of these spin positions allow for the existence of stable matter. The masses associated with these two spin positions appear to have a specific ratio, which may or may not be the onta gap number. The rotating magnetic field of the Aether maintains the primary angular momentum, thus offering us the appearance of a stable, physical Universe.

## General Structure

Primary angular momentum already describes as a circle of mass moving at a velocity, thus scanning an area. As this primary angular momentum spins through the Aether unit, the conductance of the Aether produces strong charge. In addition, as the primary angular momentum spins through the Aether it picks up elementary charge. These three characteristics, primary angular momentum, strong charge, and elementary charge, make up the structure of the onn.

The ratio of the spherical elementary charge to the equivalent spherical strong charge produces the fine structure of the onn. The fine structure times is the point of balance where the elementary charge and strong charge interact with each other. This interaction, also known as the “weak force” of the electron, appears in the atomic spectra of isotopes. For atomic nuclei, the weak interaction determines the length of time a proton can keep its bound electron before a neutron decays.

## The Electron

#### Brief History

The name electron was first used for a unit of negative electricity by the English physicist G. J. Stoney in the late 19th cent. The actual discovery of the particle, however, was made in 1897 by J. J. Thomson, who showed that cathode rays are composed of electrons and who measured the ratio of charge to mass for the electron. In 1909, R. A. Millikan measured the charge of the electron[4].

History credits J.J. Thomson with the discovery of the electron. Other researchers such as Nikola Tesla made similar observations. Tesla quotes in the New York Herald Tribune, September 22, 1929 pp. 1, 29:

“Up to 1896, however, I did not succeed in obtaining a positive experimental proof of the existence of such a medium [Aether]. But in that year I brought out a new form of vacuum tube capable of being charged to any desired potential, and operated it with effective pressures of about 4,000,000 volts. I produced cathodic and other rays of transcending intensity. The effects, according to my view, were due to minute particles of matter carrying enormous electrical charges, which, for want of a better name, I designated as matter not further decomposable. Subsequently those particles were called electrons.”

The electron has a very specific, unvarying mass equal to \(9.109 \times {10^{ - 31}}kg\). The mass is inseparable from the electron’s angular momentum. That is, one cannot dissect the electron and set aside its mass dimension apart from its length or frequency dimensions. Nor is it possible to remove the length dimension from a ruler, the mass dimension from your body, or the charge dimension from lightning.

In modern physics, we perceive electrons in several unnatural ways. We represent them in terms of mass only, electrostatic charge only, or energy. However, as explained earlier, mass is not a thing. Mass is a dimension, while energy is a unit of work.

To view the electron correctly, we must see it for what it is. The electron is primary angular momentum. The Aether determines the mass, length, and frequency dimensions of the electron. Altogether, the electron is a frequency, a surface area, a mass, and two types of charge, all rolled into one. When we analyze the effect of Aether condunctance, the primary angular momentum is equal to strong charge and elementary charge results from the electron’s passage through the Aether.

In the electron image to the right, the blue tubular loxodrome represents the spin position of the electron. The angular momentum of the electron spins in this spin position of Aether in the direction of forward time. The surface area of the blue loxodrome represents the strong charge of the electron during the interval the angular momentum spins. As the angular momentum spins, the electron also picks up the electrostatic charge of the blue sphere, which is actually distributed frequency. Thus, each onn will have spherical electrostatic charge, cardioidal (or toroidal) electromagnetic charge, and angular momentum.

The concept that physical particles forever divide is an error in human perception. Atoms comprise the smallest order of solid particles, because only at that level are there three dimensions of length within the particle. However, the angular momentum continues to impart to atoms a quasi particle or cloud-like state, which has confused scientists and resulted in the wave/particle duality conclusions. Reductionism is not a process of cutting things in half, but of reducing the complexity of a system to its simpler components however those simpler components may manifest.

The redundancy in the above description of the electron is intentional, as the nature of primary angular momentum is a new concept for most people. It takes time and reflection to understand what primary angular momentum is and how it represents the primary state of matter. Only then can we transcend the nonsensical popular notion that the particles can exist in two places at once.[5]

The classical electron radius designates by NIST to be[6]:

\[{r_e} = {\alpha ^2}{\alpha _0} \tag{8.2}\]

\[{r_e} = 2.817940325 \times {10^{ - 15}}m \tag{8.3}\]

And the Bohr radius designates by NIST to be[7]:

\[{\alpha _0} = \frac{{4\pi {\varepsilon _0}{\hbar ^2}}}{{{m_e}{e^2}}} \tag{8.4}\]

\[{\alpha _0} = 0.5291772108 \times {10^{ - 10}}m \tag{8.5}\]

As shown in the Aether Physics Model, the shape of the onn is toroidal in nature. The formula for a toroid surface area is equal to the small radius times \(2\pi \), times the large radius times \(2\pi \). Since the Aether Physics Model posits the toroid surface area of the electron, based on the Compton wavelength squared in Planck’s constant,

\[h = {m_e} \cdot {\lambda _C}^2 \cdot {F_q} \tag{8.6}\]

we can set up an identity with regard to the electron radii and the surface area of the electron:

Equation (8.2) for the classical electron radius can express in terms of quantum measurements as:

\[{r_e} = \frac{{{\lambda _C}{\alpha }}}{{2\pi }} \tag{8.7}\]

Equation (8.4) for the Bohr radius can express in terms of quantum measurements as:

\[{\alpha _0} = \frac{{{\lambda _C}}}{{2\pi \alpha }} \tag{8.8}\]

Application of these two radii for the surface area of a toroid, which must equal the Compton wavelength squared, gives:

\[2\pi \left( {\frac{{{\lambda _C}{\alpha _0}}}{{2\pi }}} \right) \cdot 2\pi \left( {\frac{{{\lambda _C}}}{{2\pi \alpha }}} \right) = {\lambda _C}^2 \tag{8.9}\]

So it appears that both the classical electron radius and the Bohr radius apply to the electron. The results of these observations should be beneficial to Quantum Physics.

Since the above analysis indicates that the electron is toroidal in nature, which also supports the Aether Physics Model, we must examine experiments that measure one or the other radius in order to see why they measure either the small radius or large radius. .

David McCutcheon inspired the concept of the classical electron radius and Bohr radius as the two radii of the electron toroid through his independent research, and resulting Ultrawave Theory[8].

## The Proton

Although the double loxodromes appear equal in the diagrams, this is only an artifact of the graphics. In reality, the electron spin position and proton spin position are not equal. Although the spin positions have the same length and frequency dimensions, they have different mass and strong charge dimensions. Also, the length dimensions of the two spin positions are only equal in their products. Both equal quantum length squared.

Let us assume that the electron and proton share the same structure. It should then be possible to model the proton in a similar manner. In the Aether Physics Model, the mechanics of the proton are identical to those of the electron, except that the mass is about 1836 times greater. In addition, the proton spins in forward time in the opposite direction as the electron. The spin position is in the positive charge sphere of the Aether and so the proton picks up positive elementary charge. It is because of these opposite spin directions that the electron and proton end up with the same spin direction when Aether units fold over to bind as a neutron.

The Standard Model presents a rather curious and counter-intuitive model of the proton. In general, it does not recognize the radius of the proton, rather, the proton and neutron presents as two manifestations of the same particle, a nucleon[9].

Let us assume that the proton and neutron structure similarly to the electron. We can then assume that the derived fine structures for the proton and neutron are correct, because the same symmetry would apply.

Using the fine structure of the proton derived on page 170, the proton small radius would be:

\[{r_p} = \frac{{{\lambda _C}p}}{{2\pi }} \tag{8.10}\]

\[{r_p} = 1.535 \times {10^{ - 18}}m \tag{8.11}\]

and the large radius would be:

\[{r_{p0}} = \frac{{{\lambda _C}}}{{2\pi p}} \tag{8.12}\]

\[{r_{p0}} = 9.717 \times {10^{ - 8}}m \tag{8.13}\]

The radii expressed in terms of quantum length would be:

\[{r_p} = 6.325 \times {10^{ - 7}}{\lambda _C} \tag{8.14}\]

\[{r_{p0}} = 4.005 \times {10^4}{\lambda _C} \tag{8.15}\]

These radii may only apply only to free protons, if at all. They are theoretical values at this time since we have found no official published radii for the proton and neutron.

As can be seen from the proportion of the small radius to the large radius, if the above values are correct, the toroid of the proton is extremely thin, with a rather large circumference.

We know that the proton and neutron change shape, depending on the isotope to which the nuclei belong. Scientists at Jefferson Labs have confirmed the various shapes of the proton, even though they attempt to explain these shapes through quark theory.

Depending on the angular momentum of the quarks, the proton could be spherical in shape or more like a doughnut, a pretzel or a peanut. Miller says the variety of shapes is nearly limitless, and depends on the momentum of the quarks and the angle between the spin of the quark and the spin of the proton[10].

## The Neutron

As with the proton, the Standard Model considers the neutron to be a nucleon. Similarly, the Standard Model does not attribute a specific radius to the neutron.

In order for the Aether Physics Model to prove correct with regard to nucleon radii, there must be nuclear data to support the theory. Perhaps such data does exist but was shelved because it was considered “anomalous”? The fact that the Standard Model does not publish a radius for either the proton or neutron does leave open the possibility that the Aether Physics Model is correct.

The reader will keep in mind that the neutron radii are speculation at this time as there is no empirical data from which to draw. It could be that the electron and proton angular momentum actually flow together like two drops of water until beta decay occurs. Alternatively, it could be that the electron is inside the proton and the anti-neutrino is captured dark matter in the space between. The research necessary to determine the exact behavior of angular momentum in a neutron is a task for professional labs.

In the Aether Physics Model, the neutron is a composite of a proton and an electron. While the neutron remains intact, it behaves like a quantum onn. The neutron can remain as a free onn for about 17 minutes[11] before decaying back into a proton and electron.

As depicted in the image on the opposite page, the neutron involves two separate Aether units, folded over onto each other. In one Aether unit, an electron occupies the electron spin position and in the other unit, a proton occupies the proton spin position.

The positive sphere of the proton attracts to the negative sphere of the electron. And since the electron and proton spin in opposite directions, when the Aether units fold over, the two onta have the same spin direction and can produce a neutron. Because the forward and reverse directions of frequency determine spin, it is independent of the onn angular momentum. The net spin of the two onta sharing folded space remains ½ while the folded Aether unit causes space-resonance to condense up to a factor of two, another effect of the neutron.

Also, note that the bound electron-proton produces what appears to be a normal Aether unit with no onta in the remaining sphere. This is why the neutron can behave like an electron or proton and bind with other neutrons.

The angular momentum of the neutron is the sum of that of the electron and proton, plus an extra amount that named the “anti-neutrino” by the Standard Model. In addition, the electron has a wobble that is slightly different from the proton, caused by the difference between the masses and the different spin positions the proton and electron take in the Aether.

We can assume that the free neutron small radius is:

\[{r_n} = \frac{{{\lambda _C}n}}{{2\pi }} \tag{8.16}\]

and the free neutron large radius is:

\[{r_{n0}} = \frac{{{\lambda _C}}}{{2\pi n}} \tag{8.17}\]

In terms of the measurements of meters and quantum length, the neutron radii express as:

\[{r_n} = 1.533 \times {10^{ - 18}}m {8.18}\]

\[{r_{n0}} = 9.717 \times {10^{ - 8}}m \tag{8.19}\]

\[{r_n} = 6.317 \times {10^{ - 7}}{\lambda _C} \tag{8.20}\]

\[{r_{n0}} = 4.005 \times {10^4}{\lambda _C} \tag{8.21}\]

We will note that the APM predicts the proton and neutron small radii are much smaller than the electron small radius, while the large radii of the proton and neutron are vastly larger. We predict that these radii apply only to a free proton and a free neutron.

When protons bind with protons and neutrons bind with neutrons in a nucleus, the strong force could cause the large radius to shrink and the small radius to grow, to the point that bound protons and neutrons would appear as spherical.

### Proton-Neutron Angular Momenta

Surprisingly, angular momentum of the proton and neutron are subatomic characteristics ignored by the Standard Model.

According to the Aether Physics Model, angular momentum is equal to the mass of the subatomic onn, times the quantum length, times the quantum velocity (speed of light). Thus, the angular momenta of the proton and neutron are easily calculated.

\[{h_p} = {m_p} \cdot {\lambda _C} \cdot c \tag{8.22}\]

where \({h_p}\) is equal to the angular momentum of the proton, \({m_p}\) is the mass of the proton, \({c}\) is the speed of light and \({\lambda _C}\) is the Compton wavelength. Similarly, the angular momentum of the neutron is:

\[{h_n} = {m_n} \cdot {\lambda _C} \cdot c \tag{8.23}\]

where \({h_n}\) denotes the angular momentum of the neutron and \({m_n}\) is the mass of the neutron. The values of these angular momenta are:

\[{h_p} = 1.217 \times {10^{ - 30}}\frac{{kg \cdot {m^2}}}{{sec}} \tag{8.24}\]

\[{h_n} = 1.218 \times {10^{ - 30}}\frac{{kg \cdot {m^2}}}{{sec}} \tag{8.25}\]

### The Neutrino

When the proton captures an electron, the Aether captures extra angular momentum between the electron and proton. This extra angular momentum likely comes from primary angular momentum existing between Aether units in the form of dark matter. The extra angular momentum induces from the conservation of the known angular momentum[12]:

\[{h_n} = {h_p} + h + {h_{ - 0}} \tag{8.26}\]

where \({h_n}\) is the angular momentum of the neutron, \({h_p}\) is the angular momentum of the proton, \({h}\) is the angular momentum of the electron (Planck’s constant) and \({h_-0}\) is the angular momentum of the anti-neutrino.

The anti-neutrino and neutrino have too much angular momentum to fit in an Aether unit. Therefore, the trapped angular momentum must confine between folded Aether units containing an electron and proton. Since the anti-neutrino angular momentum is much closer in value to that of the electron, the electron coupling to the anti-neutrino must be almost entirely responsible for keeping the anti-neutrino angular momentum spinning. (Since spin is a property that Aether imparts to onta, the anti-neutrino must couple to the electron in order to maintain its spin while trapped in a neutron).

The cavity that the anti-neutrino confines to is electromagnetic in nature, due to the strong charge of the electron and proton binding. Therefore, the cavity must follow the spin position and geometry rules of strong charge, which, like all quantum geometry, describes in terms of unit radii. What the Standard Model labels as the “anti-neutrino” we call a “neutrino.” It follows that if the proton and electron were bound matter, their spins would produce a neutrino. Further, the bound anti-matter of the positron and anti-proton would produce an anti-neutrino. The notion of matter producing anti-matter neutrinos is illogical.

The geometry of the neutrino must be toroidal \(\left( {4{\pi ^2}} \right)\) if it exists within the Aether structure. Moreover, since the neutrino couples to the electron it exists between half of the electron and proton Aether units minus half-spin \(\left( {\frac{{4{\pi ^2}}}{2} - \frac{1}{2}} \right)\). In addition, since the neutrino exists between proton and electron strong charge binding, it must have steradian angle. This gives the neutrino angular momentum, in terms of coupled electron angular momentum, as:

\[\frac{1}{{4\pi }}\left( {\frac{{4{\pi ^2}}}{2} - \frac{1}{2}} \right)h = 1.53h \tag{8.27}\]

Simplified we get:

\[\frac{{4{\pi ^2} - 1}}{{8\pi }}h = 1.53h \tag{8.28}\]

Equation (8.28) reflects the observed behavior of the neutrino when it releases during beta decay. Because the beta decay is due to the “weak interaction,” the neutrino can violate conservation of parity. What this means is that spin from electrostatic binding is due to two onta mirroring each other, as is also the case with spin from strong charge binding. However, the spin due to the neutrino in a decay process involves only one onn (the neutrino) and therefore there is only one spin parity. is the weak interaction constant.

A neutron is a proton with bound electron and captured neutrino angular momentum. As long as the neutron remains part of a nucleus through strong charge binding, the neutron will not normally decay.

Since the neutrino angular momentum does not reside in Aether, and exists in between the Aether units of the Aether fabric, the neutrino is vulnerable to displacement by other neutrinos passing through. And since neutrinos do not exist within the Aether fabric, and therefore do not have strong charge or electrostatic charge, they can easily pass through dense planets and stars. Thus, there should be an increase in nuclear beta decay during geomagnetic storms, since proton plasma striking the Earth’s upper atmosphere generates an increase of muon neutrinos.

Neutrons occasionally release from a nucleus and usually decay in about 11 to 17 minutes, but there is no law governing the half-life of a neutron and a particular neutron may decay at any given time. The process for decay may result from a collision with another neutrino, or from an electron’s magnetic moment reaching beyond the binding range of its strong charge attraction to the proton.

In addition to decay from natural collisions, it may be possible to bombard a neutron with neutrinos and initiate beta decay within an atomic nucleus[13]. Of course, certain isotopes will be less stable than others. When the electron escapes from the neutron, the neutrino angular momentum also escapes, thus providing another opportunity to initiate beta decay.

### Further Neutrino Insights

No experiment has ever conclusively detected a neutrino or anti-neutrino particle, even though the neutrino should have more angular momentum than an electron.

Neutrinos possess still another unique characteristic: they are very light. We do not know whether they possess any mass at all. It is quite possible that they have none, like photons. Still, many physicists are convinced that they do possess some mass, even if only an infinitesimal amount. In 1979, physicists at the ITEP research institute of the Academy of Sciences at Moscow claimed to have found proof that neutrinos possess a mass of about 20 eV. To date, this finding has not been corroborated by any other research center, and it most likely will be some time before we will know unequivocally whether or not neutrinos possess mass. But we do know that their mass cannot be very great, at most about 30 eV. At any rate, neutrinos are very light particles, more than ten thousand times lighter than electrons.[14]

It is interesting to note that the neutrino is supposed to have a mass ten thousand times lighter than the electron, but its angular momentum is about 1.531 times larger than the electron. Here is a simple equation you will not see in the scientific literature. Since angular momentum conserves, the angular momentum of the neutron minus the angular momentum of the proton, minus the angular momentum of the electron gives the total remaining angular momentum attributed to the neutrino.

\[{h_n} - {h_p} - h = 1.53h \tag{8.29}\]

The angular momentum of the neutrino is about 1.531 times greater than the angular momentum of the electron. According to the Aether Physics Model, if the neutrino were a true onn it would then have a mass equal to 1.531 times greater than the mass of the electron.

\[\frac{{1.531h}}{{{\lambda _C}^2 \cdot {F_q}}} = 1.531{m_e} \tag{8.30}\]

And, in fact, if the masses of the proton and electron are subtracted from the mass of the neutron we get the same result:

\[{m_n} - {m_p} - {m_e} = 1.531{m_e} \tag{8.31}\]

If the neutrino is said to have a mass ten thousand times lighter than the electron, then the Standard Model interpretation of neutrinos must be wrong. Alternatively, if the Standard Model were correct, where is the missing mass[15]? Relativity theory might claim that the mass converts into energy. But remember, energy is not a thing and mass is merely a dimension. In addition, energy is time dependent and finite. If mass were converted to energy in a subatomic particle, then the energy can only exist for so long before it is expended. Mass cannot be converted into energy for 1 million years in one instance and the same mass only exist as energy for 17 minutes in another instance. For the interpretation to be correct, the missing mass must explain in terms of angular momentum.

## The Photon

In the Standard Model, the photon is a discrete parcel of energy.

#### Photon – Standard Model Definition

The quantum of electromagnetic energy, regarded as a discrete particle having zero mass, no electric charge, and an indefinitely long lifetime.[18]

The Standard Model does not describe the photon as an actual entity, but as the quantum of energy a supposed photon would contain. In other words, the photon remains undefined even when acknowledged as possessing energy. If the definition states that the photon is a discrete particle, the particle must have some kind of physical property. Yet the mass is zero. What kind of particle has zero mass even though mass is supposed to be one of its dimensions (as evidenced by the unit of energy)?

Look at it this way. Energy defines as a unit of work, which is equal to the dimension of mass times the velocity squared:

\[joule = \frac{{kg \cdot {m^2}}}{{se{c^2}}} \tag{8.32}\]

If \(E = m{c^2}\) were a real equation that described the energy of a photon, the photon would have energy equal to:

\[\begin{array}{l} E = 0kg \cdot {c^2} \\ E = 0joule \\ \end{array} \tag{8.33}\]

The photon has zero energy if it has zero mass. At least, that is how we learn to do the math in algebra class. However, our science community tells us the mass converts to energy due to relativistic effects. Somewhere we are supposed to forget what we learned in algebra class and believe that zero mass can still amount to a huge amount of energy. In other words, the photon is pure energy, which is supposed to explain why it has zero mass. The math does not support that claim, but nonetheless it is the scientific explanation.

Therefore, there is a paradox. Energy is equal to mass times velocity squared, but the photon energy does not equal zero. We normally call such theories, “mistakes.” However, modern physics calls it Special Relativity Theory. Perhaps that is why the word “special” is in the name of the theory? We allow this theory to break the rules of mathematics and defy common sense, while other theories must hold to exact specifications.

If energy is just a unit of work, what did the mass become? Apparently, nobody knows because the definition of the photon relates to the amount of energy it possesses, not to the quantification of the photon itself. Therefore, what we really have is the question of whether or not Einstein truly quantified the photon.

As mentioned (page 120), in the Aether Physics Model the photon is an expanding electron. The angular momentum of the photon must conserve, and so it takes the form of an expanding double cardioid with a decreasing small radius. At extreme distances, the photon is merely a line with an incredibly short, small-radius.

According to the Aether Physics Model, it would appear that the photon seems to have zero mass because half of its angular momentum is in the electron spin position and the other half is in the positron spin position. Just as a particle and anti-particle annihilate, it could be that half-filled spin positions would neutralize their oppositely spinning inertias rather than annihilating each other. However, if an atom absorbs the angular momentum of the photon and merely fills an electron spin position, then once again the mass and charge would be available for physical interaction.

Another way to look at this is with the cup and water analogy. The Aether has four cups. There are two different sizes, of which the electron and positron are the same. Of these, one is spinning left the other is spinning right. The angular momentum flows easily between these two cups and thus the photon can easily convert to an electron or positron, either of which can convert back to a photon.

As the photon expands, its encapsulating Aether unit also expands. The equal distribution of angular momentum in the two halves of the Aether unit keeps it intact even with infinite stretching. And since the Aether unit is quantum and dynamic, the Aether maintains the angular momentum even for billions of light years, no matter how stretched the angular momentum becomes.

Rarely does nature send out just one photon, however. According to the Aether Physics Model, atomic structure determines frequency by the rate photon production. In order to increase the intensity of the photon stream (light), one would increase the number of excited atoms. To achieve maximum light intensity for a given substance, one would excite 100% of the atoms of that substance.

In the Standard Model, the increase of light intensity explains as the increase of input energy. When the energy input to a substance is increased, the energy output naturally increases. However, this reveals nothing about the processes occurring within the atom. From an engineering perspective, the Standard Model is less effective than the Aether Physics Model, which reveals product design options.

Depending on whether there is a valence electron in an atom, certain atoms absorb photons, whilst others reflect. By the time a given photon reaches a target atom, the angular momentum of the photon and its associated Aether unit has stretched, and only a portion of the original photon angular momentum is absorbed. The greater the distance between the source atom and the target atom, the less angular momentum will be absorbed at the target atom.

For a given target atom, angular momentum arrives from all directions at varying rates. The portion of angular momentum that arrives at the atom decelerates and then stores within the atom in a shell position with no onta. This shell position is receiving both portions of angular momentum and portions of Aether units. Depending upon the atomic structure, there may be several scenarios as to what happens next.

- The received angular momentum and Aether unit portion can be accumulated to form an electron, or
- the received angular momentum and Aether unit portion can be accumulated to form a positron, or
- the received angular momentum and Aether unit portion can be accumulated as a combination electron and positron at twice the size of a normal Aether unit.

As the quantity of accumulated angular momentum increases, it eventually reaches a point where there is a full Aether unit and its electron and/or positron spin position fills with angular momentum.

If the valence electron built up as an electron/positron pair, then it has a net zero electrostatic charge and electromagnetic charge, and ejects from its present location in the electron shell to a position further out. Depending on its momentum, the valence electron travels in steps of one quantum length in one quantum frequency (speed of light), where it will shed half the angular momentum as a 1-spin photon, or will completely dissociate from the atom and split into an electron-positron pair.

When a photon materializes, the angular momentum of the electron radiates at the speed of light and the photon is equal to:

\[phtn = h \cdot c \tag{8.34}\]

## Graviton

According to modern physics, the graviton is the quantum of the gravitational field[19]. The language is different from the Aether Physics Model, but the graviton does resemble the Aether unit. Both the Aether unit and the graviton have a spin of 2 and zero physical mass.

Nevertheless, unlike the Standard Model, the Aether unit is not only the quantum of the gravitational field; it is the quantum of all the fields. In fact, in the Aether Physics Model, the Aether unit is the only quantum that can produce a field of any kind since it also is the source of space-resonance.

## Positron

The positron has the same mass as the electron and the same electrostatic charge as the proton. Therefore it exists in the opposite spin direction to the electron and the same spin direction as the proton, on the positive sphere of the Aether unit.

It may seem counter-intuitive at first to visualize the proton and positron as having the same spin direction. However, when we look at the Aether unit from the bottom, it is easier to see.

## Anti-Proton

The anti-proton onn has the same electrostatic charge and spin direction as the electron and thus the opposite spin direction as the proton. As the electron and proton can bind and thus cause their spin directions to be the same, the positron and anti-proton can do the same and produce an anti-neutron.

In addition, similar to the gravitational repulsion of the positron and electron, the anti-proton and proton would also gravitationally repel each other. It could very well be that many of the far away galaxies are actually anti-galaxies.

Furthermore, since the electron works with the positron to produce photons in the proton-based portion of the Universe, we can assume that positrons work with electrons to produce photons in the anti-proton-based portion of the Universe. Thus, we should be able to see anti-galaxies if they are not too far distant, as the photons of matter and anti-matter are the same. Theoretically, we should be able to receive signals from civilizations made of anti-matter via radio transmissions.

## Exotic Collision Effects

The Aether Physics Model is a true quantum model in that it explains the structure of stable onta that make up the physical Universe. So-called “particles” that last for less than a minute are not the primary building blocks of a stable Universe; they are the temporary effects of collisions. In the Aether Physics Model, the focus is on establishing a structural model for the stable forms of existence that make up the vast portion of the visible Universe.

When sufficient resources and access to data has been obtained, there can be further research into muons, tau particles, and other collision effects within the paradigm of the Aether Physics Model.

[1] It suffices for our purposes to notice that there is no empirical evidence that any of these particles exist; they are discussed in elementary particle physics because they appear in theories that are untested but attractive generalizations of successful theories, and they are considered in cosmology because they have some interesting and conceivably beneficial properties. Morton S. Roberts, ed., Astronomy & Astrophysics (Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science, 1985) 285.

[3] Barry Parker, Einstein's Dream: The Search for a Unified Theory of the Universe (New York: Plenum Press, 1986) 265.

[5] A Dial-Up Quantum Reality (in Research News) David Kestenbaum, Science, New Series, Vol. 279, No. 5356. (Mar. 6, 1998), p. 1457.

[6] The NIST Reference on Constants, Units, and Uncertainty http://physics.nist.gov/cgi-bin/cuu/Value?eqre|search_for=radius

[7] The NIST Reference on Constants, Units, and Uncertainty http://physics.nist.gov/cgi-bin/cuu/Value?eqbohrrada0|search_for=radius

[9] "…the proton and the neutron are different states of the same elementary particle, the nucleon." Walter C. Michels, International Dictionary of Physics and Electronics (New Jersey: Van Nostrand, 1956) 726.

[10] Zooming in on a proton packed with surprises, 2003 JLab News Release http://www.jlab.org/div_dept/dir_off/public_affairs/news_releases/2003/03protonshape.html

[11] "In a nucleus the neutron can be stable, but a free neutron decays with a half - life of about 17 min (1,013 sec), into a proton, an electron, and an antineutrino." "Neutron ," The Columbia Encyclopedia , 6th ed.

[12] Because the neutrino itself cannot be detected easily, inasmuch as its interaction with matter is so weak that it will usually pass through any detector untouched, the neutrino helicity is best measured indirectly through measurements of the momenta and angular momenta of all the other particles taking part in the decay. Assuming the conservation of momentum and angular momentum, any missing momentum and angular momentum must be assigned to the neutrino. Robert K. Adair, The Great Design: Particles, Fields, and Creation (New York: Oxford University Press, 1989) 284.

[13] "an energetic neutrino can induce the reverse of the decay that produced it. " "Neutrino ," The Columbia Encyclopedia , 6th ed.

[14] Harald Fritzsch, The Creation of Matter: The Universe from Beginning to End, trans. Jean Steinberg (New York: Basic Books, 1984) 122.

[15] To add a disconcerting touch to the mystery of beta decay, it was found that microcalorimetric measurements of the heat given up by the disintegration of RaE showed that the effective energy in heating is the mean energy of the beta particles. Thus it appeared that an energy of Emax was given up at each disintegration, but only a variable fraction of this energy was ever measured; the rest of the energy mysteriously vanished. Lapp and Andrews Nuclear Radiation Physics (New York, Prentice-Hall, Inc. 1948) 172