All repeated with permission from Wal Thornhill !
Yeah Wal lets get back to "REAL" physics! Im with you!“You will have to be more specific about any deficiency in the electrical model that you think requires investigation in terms of 'scalar waves,' whatever those two words mean. Please be aware that the EU model of gravity relies on the direct (longitudinal) action of the electric force, which relates (it seems to me) directly to Tesla's lab work. One of the problems I see with having Tesla's work accepted is the use of terms like 'scalar waves,' which to me is as meaningless, physically, as 'wave-particle' duality of the photon.”
“From the little I have read, Meyl shows glimmers of real insights through a fog of metaphysics. It seems a problem endemic to modern physics. My preference is to start with a real electrical model of matter, like Sansbury's, and work from there.”
“Forget Einstein. His peculiar views taken together with quantum mysticism cause a lot of confused arguments ”
“Phonons, as 'virtual particles' like photons, do not exist. They fall out of the metaphysics of quantum theory. Effects may be seen that can be interpreted theoretically that way, but remember quantum theory is not real physics. Quantum theory discards cause and effect so that it reads like science fiction. “
“As soon as a physicist talks of particle creation and formation of the universe you can tune out. That's not physics either. Certainly not in our present state of ignorance.”
“The real problem is that no one understands quantum physics. It's not even real physics because it defies the causal principle; an effect has a probability of occurring without any preceding cause. And the barrier to the idea of new matter (which is not the same as mass) coming from "nowhere" is that it defies another principle of physics - "no creation ex nihilo." So it's too bad training in the history and philosophy of science and critical thinking is not required for a science degree.”
“I consider virtual particles (like photons) to be artefacts due to invalid concepts. I would say that the transverse polarization of neutrinos by the transmitting antenna is passed on longitudinally by the near instantaneous electrostatic force between adjacent neutrinos. The speed of light is then a measure of the inertia of the neutrino dipoles. I don't consider any longitudinal displacement of the medium.”
“This simple picture conforms to the principle of physics which states there can be no creation or annihilation of matter. It is a principle honored in the breach by modern physics and big bang theory. The notion that their must be a "deep esoteric explanation" is symptomatic of the metaphysical approach to physics introduced by Einstein.
It is interesting that Einstein disliked quantum theory because of its probabilistic nature and he thought that it signalled some lower level of structure in matter. If what I'm saying is correct, Einstein was right on this occasion. And quantum effects can be viewed as resonant interactions between particles, involving a lower level of structure of electrons, protons, neutrons and neutrinos. Another principle of physics, that of cause and effect, can then be reestablished in quantum physics. We can return to the real world of classical physics and begin to ask real questions, like what are the massless charged building blocks of matter and how might they have originated? Is there ever more 'wheels within wheels?' “
“The fundamental problem is that we don't know enough to even ask the
right questions. And language is so misused and bent out of shape
that no one knows what some scientists are talking about (and neither
do they).”
“As you can see, this model requires returning to classical physics.
It means dumping all of the metaphysics introduced in the 20th
century. Goodbye Einstein. “
“Our ignorance about origins is profound. As I said earlier, we don't
even know enough to ask the right questions yet. When we understand
electric charge and the electric force we might just begin to ask
such questions about an Electric Universe.
Wal”
“Neutrinos are not massless. Therefore thermal neutrinos are weakly attracted to ponderable bodies like The Sun and the Earth. That is why starlight bends around stars (goodnight Einstein). And that is why the Michelson-Morley experiment detected only a small residual relative movement with respect to the æther. Of course it was said to be zero, otherwise the special theory of relativity was invalid (sleep tight Einstein).”
“Neutrinos are normal matter so they interact normally with other particles. It's just that their cross-section for interaction with a nuclear particle is vanishingly small.
In fact it is my view that neutrinos are the probable cause of most of the seemingly random radioactive decay processes. You must remember that quantum theory remains a theory with no physical model to underpin it. Effects have no cause. As such it forms a really solid pillar of modern cosmology-I don't think!
Wal”
“I do not believe that photons or 'virtual' photons are real entities. .”
“It's my view that the resonant electrical structure of matter and the near-infinite speed of the electric force can explain what's going on. Meanwhile the metaphysics of Einstein and quantum theory clouds our vision.”
“The hydrino is the name given to new form of hydrogen where the
electron has dropped to a fractional Bohr ground state and in doing
so has released a great deal of energy. That's something thought to
be impossible in quantum theory. However quantum theory is not clear
about why it's impossible. In fact, quantum theory is not clear about
most things.
Wal”
“seems you, like everyone else, are bamboozled by the loose language in physics. Einstein's well-known relationship between mass and energy says nothing whatsoever about matter and energy.
If we apply one of the principles of physics, matter cannot be created or destroyed. So the notion of "anti" matter is misleading and a poor use of language (once again). “
“The idea of normal matter being composed of smaller units of charge came from Ralph Sansbury in his paper Electron Structure. Even now there is debate about whether an electron has structure, while protons and neutrons are accepted to have structure. There is experimental evidence for electron structure. The fact that it has spin and a magnetic moment requires structure.”
“My view of light fits with my notion of neutrinos as the most collapsed form of matter. Light has no wave/particle duality. It is simply a wave in a medium - the medium of neutrinos and normal matter. “
“Another great puzzle of modern physics is that in general relativity, there is no such thing as a 'universal time' that makes clocks tick at the same rate everywhere. Instead, gravity makes clocks run at different rates in different places. But quantum mechanics, which describes physical phenomena at infinitesimally small scales, is meaningful only if time is universal; if not, its equations make no sense.”
“It is obvious, in a universe where the electric force operates at near infinite speed and where there is an ether, that Einstein's Special theory of relativity no longer applies. (Lorentz's does). There is a universal time. Quantum mechanics works, but now it has a cause - the resonant charge substructure and interactions of all matter.
And, of course, the mystical notion of 4-dimensional space-time is revealed as nonsense, as is Einstein's view of gravity as a property of space, rather than matter. From this it follows that black holes, the expanding universe, cosmic strings, the "twins" paradox, time travel, etc., etc. are all nonsense.”
“The only normal matter we know that has a vanishingly small mass is the neutrino.
So it would seem likely that neutrinos have all of the constituents to produce normal matter and anti-matter when they absorb gamma-radiation above a threshold energy. We don't need the probabilistic quantum theory nonsense of "vacuum energy" which allows particles to "wink in and out of existence." “
“The question of the existence of an ether needs to be reexamined. A wave of any kind needs a medium to wave.”
“All we need nowis for particle physicists to recognize quantum behavior as nothing mysterious - only near-instantaneous resonant electrical interactions between atoms.”
“In my simple-minded view, quantum mechanics shows that matter is fundamentally organized into resonant systems of charged subunits (quarks?) that combine to produce the stable forms of matter - the proton, neutron, electron and neutrino, together with their "antimatter" counterparts. Note that the electron and neutrino have structure too in this model. There is experimental evidence that this is so. In fact the idea that neutrinos can "change flavor" requires that they have structure and a vanishingly small mass.
The word "antimatter" is a misnomer in my view since all matter is composed of the same subunits of charge. Following the principles of physics, matter cannot be destroyed, so matter and antimatter cannot annihilate each other. All that happens is that the charged subunits of matter and antimatter combine to form a new, very low energy resonant state - the neutrino - the most collapsed form of stable matter.”
“The "zoo" of particles seen in high-energy particle smashing experiments are simply short-lived unstable resonant systems of the charged subunits of matter.
Now, all of this seems simple and easy to visualize. Why, you might ask, hasn't it been considered long ago?
My friend, Ralph Sansbury, provided the key to this puzzle way back in 1981. It requires dismissal of many dogmatic beliefs of modern physics and a return to classical physics. “
“The implications are obvious. Before this kind of simple, classical, real-world model can be investigated, Einstein must be removed from the pedestal that others placed him on. How long is that going to take? Ironically, his early work actually stood in the way of his understanding and unifying the relationship between electromagnetism and gravity. Yet I feel sure that he glimpsed the possibilities of a similar model when he complained about probabilistic quantum theory, "God doesn't play dice..." He felt that some lower level of structure and order would be found to restore the key principle of physics - that of cause and effect.”
“Inventing particles to transfer force makes no sense to me. This propensity to invent imaginary particles lands us in a conceptual mess, like the wave/particle duality of light. Quantum chromodynamics (QCD), is the accepted theory for the description of the strong nuclear force. It makes Alice in Wonderland sound like a paragon of sensible logic.”
“Ralph Sansbury, published a small Journal of Classical Physics on "Electron Structure." In it he proposed that all subatomic particles (electrons, protons, neutrons) are composed of smaller subunits of charge in some kind of resonant structure - rather like small atoms.
This seems like an eminently reasonable suggestion. In fact Einstein hinted that such a thing might lie behind quantum mechanics. But on close examination it requires that the electric force between the charges orbiting within the classical radius of an electron must operate at a near-infinite speed. In other words, we must dethrone Einstein. The advantages in doing so are manifold. Instantly we strip all of the metaphysics from modern science and return to a "new" classical physics where there is universal time and only 3 dimensions in space. Magnetism, gravity and the strong nuclear force become manifestations of the instantaneous electric force. Mass and gravity become a fundamental electrical property of matter, not of empty space or an "ether." The universe becomes a coherent, connected electrical structure. All matter and biological systems rely on resonances between linked electrical systems. Quantum mechanics gains a physical reality for the first time. This is the thinking behind my claim that we live in an ELECTRIC UNIVERSE.”
I fully agree to give Einstein some more credit. I would just reiterate the cause and effects rule is only valid for laws based on statistics, not for quantum/collective EM behaviour. 
