main page   list of papers   library  

AETHEREAL CATECHESIS

(Last update: August, 1, 2008)

There are Karim Khaidarov's answers on questions of researchers, appearing during considering of ethereal physics. The verity of answers may be clear only in distant future, when on the one hand physicists will leave from relativistic religion, but on the other hand, when new experiments and observations will made clear true pictire.

What is the aether?
What is the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB)?
Why relativism (SRT and GRT) is not a true science?
Why the notion of "physical vacuo" is wrong?
Why Michelson's experiment is a stunt?
Why the "black holes" are fiction?
Why the distortion of galaxies images is not gravitational lensing?
What is solution of Olbers Paradox?
Can white dwarfs decay after some evolution?
There is a contradiction between your conclusions and Dr. Arp's approach. He confirms that quasars are born in the centres of galaxies and QSOs are proto-matter. But you assert that quasars are graveyards of stars. Who is right?

 

What is the aether?

Cosmic aether is the base physical matter in the Universe, filling all physical space, the environment of all physical phenomena. There is nothing in Universe except the aether. The physical fields (electric, magnetic, electromagnetic...) are forms of aether movement. All elementary particles of material (the electrons, protrons, neutrons...) consist of aether, being deformational poles of aethereal environment. The atoms of material consist of aethereal elementary particles. The molecules and other bodies consist of the atoms.

What is the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB)?

The Cosmic Microwave Background is the blackbody emission of the Space, corresponding to 2.7ºK temperature. The Solar system moves within outer space at the speed of 360±30 km/s comparatively this emission that is to say there is Doppler shift of frequency dependent on siderial (stellar) direction.

Every reasonable person will say that there is not a smile without a cat and there is no smoke without fire, something there must be, warm, radiating EM-waves, corresponding to this temperature. Really, this radiation there is heat emission of particles of aether, having 2.7ºK temperature. As far back as century ago great chemists and physicists D. Mendeleev and Walter Nernst have predicted, that the emission (temperature) must come to light in Cosmos. In 1933 prof. Erich Regener from Stuttgart has measured that temperature by means of stratospheric probes. His measurements gave 2.8ºK - practically the exact modern value.

But the years have passed, whole German physics were declared the fascist physics and it is became "politically decent" do not to refer to scientific works of the German physicists of that epoch, more so that majority of them kept the positions of aethereal physics, but not Puincare-Einstein relativism. In 1965 two americans Penzias (migrant from Germany) and Wilson have declared that they open the Cosmic Microwave Background. After several years they won Nobel Prize, as ostensibly nobody did not know Prof. Regener's work.

The relativistic explanation of this phenomenon became necessary. Joseph Shklowski, the person of prominent fantasy has thinked up necessary explanation. He has brought forth absolutely absurd idea of "Relict Emission" remained after "Big Bang" that is to say after "birth" of the Universe.

In 1974 - 1980 Prof. St. Marinov from Graz, Austria, has done the series of experiments, in which he has shown that the Earth moves relatively Absolute Cosmic Reference System at the speed of 360±30 km/s. Naturally, he get refusal anywere for publication and he has began the issue of his own scientific journal "Deutsche Physik", where he explained phenomena discovered by him.

In 1990-ths only the Doppler measurements by means of radiotelescopes have shown the Marinov velocity for CMB. Naturally nobody did not want remember about Marinov.

However, it is inaccessible for relativists to hide main properties of CMB, the indicator of existance of the aether, the Absolute Reference System in the Space, and, consequently, it is disclaimer of Poincare-einstein relativism, which asserts that all inertial reference systems are equal.

Why relativism (SRT and GRT) is not a true science?

True science bases on causality, on laws of the Nature given us in physical phenomenas (facts).

Inspite of this SRT and GRT are built on axiomatic postulates that is to say in principal that cannot be proved, the dogmates, in which the followers of these teachings are obliged to believe. That is to say relativism is a form of religion, cult (bloated by political machine of mythical authority of Einstein and his faithfull followers, raised in rank of saints of relativistic physics).

As any idolatory religion, relativism is false in its base. It disagrees the facts. Amongst them there are following phenomena.

1. The Electromagnetic wave (in religious terminology of relativism - "the light") has strictly constant velocity 300.000 km/s, absurdly independent of any physical frame. Really, the EM-waves have different velocity in material (for instance, ~200.000 km/s in glass and ~3.000.000 km/s in surface layer of metals, different velocity in aether (see "Temperature of aether and redshifts"), different velocity for different frequencies (see "On Velocity of EM-waves")

2. Unlike the other physical waves relativistic light is a mythical phenomenon by itself, because it has no physical carrier. Relativistic "light" is oscillations of nothing in nothing.

3. It is possible manipulate with time (the deceleration) in relativism so, it breaks obligatory for any science principles of causality and strict logic. In relativism the time stops at velocity of light (so there is absurd to speak of frequency of photon in relativism). In relativism there are possible such violences as statement about mutual excess of age of twins moving with subluminal velocity, and other mockeries on logic, inherent for any religion.

4. In gravitational relativism (GRT) notwithstanding observed facts there is the statement about angular deflection EM-waves in empty space under the action of gravity. However it is known that the light from upstaged double stars not subject to such deflection, but "confirming fact", which ostensibly observed by A. Eddington in 1919 in respect of Sun, is falsification. "Gravitational lensing" ostensibly observed near far galaxies (but not in the scale of stars, where it must be according to GRT formulas!), is a termal lensing caused by change of density of aether due to heating it by myriad stars.

As in any idolatory religion, relativism presents itself the instrument of ideological subservience of people by means of absolutely unscrupulous manipulate by their phyche for achievement of interests of certain groups of people standing at the steering wheel of this thief machinery.

Why the notion of "physical vacuo" is wrong?

When one or another physicist speaks about "physical vacuum", he does not understand absurdity of this term, or he bluffs being hidden or evident adherent of relativistic ideology.

It is easy to understand this having addressed to headwaterses of origin of this notion. It was born in 1930-ths, when Paul Dirac has understood that clean type negation of aether, as the great mathematician, but mediocre physicist Henry Poincare did, it is impossible already. Too many facts disagree that.

For protection of relativism Paul Dirac has introduced unphysical and illogical notion of negative energy, and then the existance of "sea" of two compensating each other energy in vacuum, positive and negative, as well as "sea" of compensating each other particles, the virtual (that is to say appearing) electrons and positrons in vacuo.

However such statement of the problem is intrinsically inconsistent (the virtual particles are invisible, and it is possible to consider them in one event being absent, but in other being present arbitrarily) and discordant to relativism (that is to say discordant to negation of aether, since at presence of such particles in vacuum the relativism is already imposible).

When some researchers, trying conciliate relativism and ethereal physics, assert, for instance, that cosmos consists on 70% from "physical vacuum", but on 30% - from material and field, they fall into fundamental logical contradiction. This contradiction consists of following.

The substance and the field are not something separate from aether, as well as human body is not something separate from atoms and molecules forming it. The body is these atoms and molecules, collected in certained order. As well as material is not something separate from elementary particles, but it consists of them as base matter. As well as elementary particles consist of particles of aether as its basic matter. Thereby, all in Universe is aether. The aether is 100%. The elementary particles and all rest consist from it. Electromagnetic and other fields are different types of oscillations, deformations and pressure variations in aether.

A notion of "physical vacuum" in quantum theory implies that first, it has not the physical nature, there are virtual particles only having no physical reference system. Secondly, "physical vacuum" is lowest state of field, the "zero-point" that disagrees the real facts, since all energy of matter is kept in aether and there is no other energy, no other carrier of fiels and material.

Unlike of cunning notion of "physical vacuum", as it were compatible with relativism, the notion of "aether" implies the presence of base level of whole physical matter having own reference system (detectable experimentally, for instance, through cosmic microwave background (CMB), the heat emission of aether), so being carrier of 100% energy of Universe, but is not a "zero-point" or remaining "zero oscillations".

Why Michelson's experiment is a stunt?

Michelson's experiment is really a circus focus, hypnotized physicists during 120 years.

The secret in following. There is substitution made in it, similar to school jocular task on cleverness. There is asking:
- How many apples on a birch if there are 5 apples on one branch, there are 10 apples on other branch and so on...
Herewith, the basic fact that apples do not grow on birch conceptually, is hided at attention of pupil.

Michelson put a question about movement of aether comparatively interferometer resting in laboratory system. However if we search for the aether as base matter, from which all material including interferometer, laboratory and the Earth consists of, we must take into account that aether is still relatively terrestrial material because aether and material are the same thing and it can not move comparatively itself.

Strangely that Michelsons circus stunt has possessing of physicists wits on full serious during 120 years, though we can find its prototypes in many fairy tales of all folk. Those tales have a goal to show possible cheetings for children and to protect them in adult life.

Why the "black holes" are fiction?

The "black holes" myth is product of a myth about photon - cannon kernel. This myth was born in antique times. Mathematical development it has received in works of Isaac Newton as the corpuscular theory of light. The mass property was assigned to a corpuscle of light. From that followed that it is possible the turning of a trajectory of a beam of light on a parabola at high gravity accelerations, as it happens to the cannon-ball in a gravitational field of the Earth.

Fairy tales about "Schwarzschilds radius", "Howkings black holes" were born from here. However, these fairy tales a little bit ancient. In 1795 mathematician Pierre Simon Laplace wrote [quote from book: Braginski V.B., Polnariov A. G. Amazing gravitation. Moscow., Nauka, 1985 (Russ.)]:

"If diameter of a star with the same density as Earth, would surpass diameter of the Sun in 250 times, any beam emitted by it can not escape it owing to attraction of a star. Hence, it is possible, that largest of luminous celestial bodies are invisible for this reason."

But as it was determined in 20-th century, photon has not mass and can not interact with gravitational field as weighty material.

The fairy tale about angular beam deflection of light near to the Sun was revived by the Einstein in the beginning of 20 century and it has been picked up by apologist of a relativism Eddington. It is sad, but all these fairy tales are considering as a science till now.

Really, any gravitational field can not change a vector of beam of light irrepressibly and furthermore can not reverse direction of light. It would break a conservation law of a momentum. There are only phenomena of a transversal drift of a beam known as a stellar abberation of James Bradley and phenomenon of George Nikitin, at which the momentum of vector of light is constant, and there are only Galilean composition of velocities and apparent angular variation caused by last.

It is easy to check an absence of real irreversible turn of a beam of light. It can be seen in a good telescope. At cover light of a distant star by near star there should be two images of a distant star: one, lagging on the part of pass of a distant star, and another, anticipating, on the part of rise. And at absence of cover, but during close transiting of a beam it should be visible bending of a trajectory of a distant star. But nobody observed it.

Fig. 1. Gedanken, but unobservable experiment on bifurcation of the image of a covered star.

When relativists consider strong gravitational fields, they forget that the square of speed of light is a limiting gravity potential, and it can be never overcome, even in the consistent relativistic theory.

Substantially, on fly by weak gravitational fields that create the Earth and Sun, light is under influence only weak gravitational change of frequency appropriate to a difference of gravity potentials of points of emission and a point of reception. Here we can record

(1)

Here: φ is gravity potential on a surface of a celestial body, γ is gravitational constant, M is mass of celestial body, R is its radius; f0 is frequency of light on an emitting surface; f is a frequency of the same quantum at a point of reception far from celestial body.

The rightness of expressions (1) is checked multiply, including series of experiments similar to Pound Rebka experiment and measurement of Fraunhofer lines redshift on a limb of the Sun.

If we accept a reasonable position, which declared that all material consists of the matter (the aether), that is any material is only a part of the matter, and for the carrier main matter there is everywhere constant and maximal gravitational potential c2, the attitude of potentials in (1) should be inevitable less than 1.

Really, lets write Z definition

Z = (f0 f)/f

thence and from (1) we may get

or

φ/c2 = (Z-1 + 1)-1 < 1

Impossibility of black holes" and Schwarzschilds radius is clear from here. Light flying even through the strongest gravitational field has lost only a part of its energy for overcoming of a gravitational potential. That is for an observer located far from a massive celestial body, light emitted from a surface of this body will have redshift uniquely dependent on the attitude M/R (see fig.2).

φ = γM/R = γρ4πR2/3 = γρS/3

where ρ is average density of celestial body; S is area of surface of the body.

Fig. 2. Connection between gravity potential and gravitational Z.

Why the distortion of galaxies images is not gravitational lensing?

Relativists interpret the garbling of galaxies images as influence gravitational forces on angular propagation of light.

Herewith they forget that scale of action of GTR is small angles near stellar surface, where indeed this effect does not exist (eclipsed binaries). The Difference in scales of phenomena of real garbling the images of galaxies and mythic deflection near stars is 1011. Let's bring the analogy. It is possible speak about influence of surface pull on drop form, but it is impossible seriously speak about surrface pull as a reason of seagoing tides.

The aethereal physics finds the answer to observed phenomenon of garbling images of galaxies. This is result of heating of arther near galaxies, the change of its density and, consequently, the change of light velocity on intergalactic distances in consequence of refraction of light in aether of different density. The proof of termal nature of garbling the images of galaxies is a straight line a relationship of this distortion from radio-frequency emission of Spaces that is to say emission of aether in this place, the shift of CMB spectrum in considering direction in radio-frequency band.

What is solution of Olbers Paradox? (Wadim Wydrenkov, july 24 2008, forum www.inauka.ru)

Let's recall that Olbers Paradox is in absence of light of myriad stars on the sky while we consider Universe endless. Thinking so, it seems, we must take into consideration that radiation of distant stars will be totalized with radiation of near stars, and sky must have the average temperature as photoshperes of stars. At absorption of light by interstellar material, it will get hot up to the temperature of stellar photoshperes and must radiate also brightly like stars.

Really, the light quanta passing milliards light years will return its energy to aether, the "empty Space", and light of distant stars is not totalized with light of near one. The distant stars become red, and quite distant stars become radio stars cease to be visible in general.

The aether having monstrous heat capacity in consequence will return its energy to stars in process of gravitation. So-called the First Law of Thermodynamics, but correctly the law of conservation of energy is completely kept, but part of energy moves over to aether, which has very low temperature, 2.7ºK.

Can white dwarfs decay after some evolution? (Boris Andreyev, April, 20, 2008)

- Yes, they can. To my mind, and it seems confirmed by new observations supernovae are nuclear explosions of white dwarfs, reached the condition of nuclar explosion, the critical mass of atomic chain reaction.

It pertains, at least once, to supernovae type 1a (SN1a).

Besides optical observations, the validation of this view is:

- the presize equality of tnt equivalent of SN1a that is considered in articles "The Eternal Universe", The Structure of Celestial Bodies and "The temperature of aether and quasars";

- forming the pulsars ("neutron stars") on place of SN explosion that is possible only if there is an explosion on absolutely spherical surface (the layer) and the centre of star was compressed all-round.

According my aethereal paradigm the material of white dwarf is in supercompressed state, when under-stratums are in "metha-solid" phase condition that is to say in supercompressed solid state. This is original lithosphere of white dwarf. Above there are layers in "metha-liquid" condition that is material in supercompressed fluid state. This is hyrosphere of white dwarf.
Above that there is fine atmosphere of white dwarf, observed by optical tools.

The division of elements and isotopes on specific gravity occurs in hydrosphere of white dwarf in connection with very high tension of gravity field. It creates the condition for forming the layers of isotopes, having critical mass for atomic chain reaction. As soon as critical mass will be reached, the nuclear chain reaction occurs in this layer. This is supernova explosion.

Ideal spheric layer creates the condition of cumulative compression of central part of star up to pressure of all electronic shells of atoms collapse and turning the material into neutrons. This is a reason of arising the pulsar after supernova.

Further observations by means of telescopes of cosmic basing will show that more clear.

Karim Khaidarov, April 20, 2008.

There is a contradiction between your conclusions and Dr. Arp's approach. He confirms that quasars are born in the centres of galaxies and QSOs are proto-matter. But you assert that quasars are graveyards of stars. Who is right? (a participant of Dr. Arp's forum www.haltonarp.com, July 2005)

Dr. Arp is right in his approving that quasars are formed in the centres of galaxies and they are often thrown from there in series. It is shown by Him on many examples, for instance, in paper "Astronomy By Press Release - News From A Black Hole".
And my statement that quasars are last stage to starry evolution is true. (see "Supercompressed States of Material and Quasars")

It is in agreement simply.

The matter in following. In the general direction of evolution of celestial bodies from small (light) to bigger (heavy) to account of accretion (the natural fall of each body to other), there is exceptions confirming this rule and providing closing the rotation of material in Universe (see "Stellar Evolution").

These exceptions appear, when kinetic condition of stability of gravitating systems (parts of heavenly body, system of gravitating bodies) is broken. This condition is defined by Rudolf Clausius's virial theorem, 1870.

2K < P

where K - is kinetic energy of system, P - is potential energy of system.

Violation of this condition occurs in critical points of process of accretion of material. There are following critical points.

1. The accumulation of kinetic energy of gas mass in red giant (RG) or red super-giant (RSG) up to level of exceeding orbital velocity for given distance from the centre of mass RG/RSG. Herewith at first a close binary star system is formed, and then it decays to "running" stars scatterring from place of source close binary system at the speed gained at moment of take-off (at the excess of the escape velocity for component of binary system).

2. Arising the condition of collapse of kernel of red super-giant in state of "blue dwarf" (sub-dwarf), when under the action of hyperhigh pressure and under relatively low temperature the central part of star subjects to phase conversion of gas into meta-liquid supercompressed state with producing of energy of phase transition, providing radial velocity of outflow of shell of the star of order 30 km/s (a bit higher than escape velocity) and forming a planetary nebula.

3. Arising the condition of supernava explosion, when products of nuclear reaction have undoubtedly higher velocity than the escape velocity. The material of detonated star (except of supercompressed kernel, the pulsar) scatters in cosmic dust and interstellar gas.

4. The Excess of kinetic energy of rotation of quasar of the escape velocity, and surge of affiliated quasar. Finding this velocity in observation we can define level of gravity on host-quasar. As result of active accretion with high primary direction of vector of linear velocity and vector of rotation, as it is in the centres of galaxies, such surges can be repeated while there is condition of active accretion. Exactly last case there was discovered by alive classic of astrophysics Dr. Halton Christian Arp.

5. The emission of high-velocity particles, the products of nuclear reactions, occurring in nearby surface layers of heavenly body. The Example of such emission is "solar wind" created deuterium-tritium explosions on the Sun, the solar flashes and consisting on more than hour flight distance from protrons and electrons, but really from neutrons disintegrated during minutes on protrons and electrons (see "Real Solar Dynamics").

main page   list of papers   library  


, 1990- CMB ( ), 1974. , . FAQ .

: 1 2014 .
Bourabai Research Institution home page

   - Bourabai Research Bourabai Research Institution    -  XXI