Natural Science Forum / Physics / Particle Physics / February 2005

I am laying out the fundamentals of a new theory which replaces the
so-called Standard Model, and which demonstrates that Newton, Maxwell, and
Einstein were either fools or hucksters.
================================
Point 1:
The sun is clearly red in the morning and undeniably red in the evening, but
there is no such red-shifting visible at noon. This is because the sun at
noon is directly overhead and passing horizontally over the face of the
earth from east to west. There is no component of the sun's velocity at noon
that is pointing toward the earth (except possibly at the spring equinox,
when the sun is approaching the earth to make it warmer, but that's a small
effect that will be ignored here). There is thus no red-shifting at noon.

In the morning, the sun is approaching the earth from the east with velocity
v. Thus, the speed of light coming from the sun is c+v. For a wave,
(wave speed) = (frequency) x (wavelength).
Since the wave speed is higher, and the frequency is the same, the
wavelength must go up. Longer wavelength means a shift to the red.

In the evening, the sun is receding from the earth toward the west with
velocity v. Thus, the speed of light coming from the sun is c-v.
Since the wave speed is lower, and the wavelength is the same, the frequency
must go down. Lower frequency means a shift to the red.

And it is patently obvious that the sun can only emit one kind of light,
red-shifted or not red-shifted, and that all observers on Earth must see the
same sun at any given time. Thus, when it is red, it is red for all
observers. It is apparent to any but the most childish mind that this
implies that the earth is indeed flat.

Furthermore, this model is supported by experimental evidence, published on
the Internet at http://www.google.com/search?q=+androc1es+actual+data

Einstein and Maxwell would have us believe that c is a constant, when there
is daily evidence that it is not. They were hucksters and egregious hoaxes,
and they've suckered four generations of scientists to their corrupt
thinking.

================================
Point 2:
The notion that sub-atomic particles can be either particles or waves, the
so-called Heisenberg particle-wave duality, is nothing more than a scheme to
make struggling students dizzy and question their own intelligence.

Moreover, Gregor Mendel's periodic table of the elements is needlessly
complicated, saying that all things are made of 114 different kinds of
atoms. Why 114? Why has the Standard Model no explanation for the arbitrary
parameter 114.

My theory, crafted in decades of thinking in the back booth at the Lazy Q
Diner, is much simpler in concept and in calculation. In essence (though it
may be difficult for some to grasp at first), all things are made of
fundamental particles that correspond to the kind of object it is. There is
a one-to-one correspondence between objects and fundamental particles that
comprise them. This resolves particle-wave duality neatly. Water is made
from waterons, which are clearly waves, because otherwise there would be no
way water could make waves at the beach. Billiard-balls are made of ballons,
which are clearly particles, because otherwise billiard balls would not
collide on the pool table the way they do. There are more complicated
examples of objects which can collide but also exhibit the wave behavior of
passing through each other. For example, SUVons and white-tailed deerons
exhibit true particle-wave duality in collisions.

The simplicity of this model explains why the Standard Model is nothing but
a fabrication with more arbitrary parameters than one can hold in the head.

================================
Point 3:
Light is neither a particle or a wave. Any uncorrupted child can tell you
light is a ray. Turn on a flashlight. Can waves cause shadows or travel in
straight lines? I think not. Does all the light come out of a flashlight in
bursts, or is it a continuous beam? I think the latter.

Double-slit interference is caused by shadows of light rays impinging on the
aether (made of aetherons) in the slits.

The photoelectric effect is caused by excitation of aetherons which, when
energized by a light ray, strike the surface of a metal and eject an
electron.

Light is a ray. It can not be a bullet-like photon. It cannot be a lapping
wave. A bullet gun goes "Bang. Bang." A wave gun would go "Whoosh, Whoosh."
A ray gun goes "Bzzzzzzt!"

QED.
================================

Further details of this theory will be available soon on the Internet, and
have been submitted for publication (at the recommendation of a Mr. Seto) to
the prestigious journal Brake Fluid Quarterly.

PD