Universal Lattice Theory
(formerly titled The Pressure of the Universe or POTU theory)
John David Best
Linear velocity is the time rate of change of the distance between two points, with one of the points representing the thing in motion. For most practical purposes, it suffices to use an observer or another object which is taken to be at rest, as the second point. In the case of velocity associated with force however, it is not obvious what the second point is.
Consider the case of velocity that causes magnetic force. According to the Lorentz Force Law, Fmag = q(v x B), we know that a magnetic force occurs between moving elementary electric charges. The question is what does the velocity, v , in the above equation represent? According to this equation, the direction of the force depends on the direction of the charge velocity. Currents in the same direction in two parallel wires produce an attraction between the wires, but currents in opposite directions produce repulsion. So how does one differentiate between currents moving in opposite directions, and currents moving in the same direction but at different velocities? Under the conventional picture of current being charges flowing along the wire; in both cases, the charges in the two wires are traveling away from each other. How about two charges moving in the same direction at the same velocity? If everything else in the universe disappeared except for the two moving charges, this should have no effect on the force between them. It might be argued that there must be a third-party “observer” for the force to exist. This is no real solution to the lack of something for velocity to be relative to, because then there is nothing for the motion of the observer to be relative to. Additionally, different observers traveling at different velocities would see different amounts of force – but this cannot be the case. Force causes change; it bends and breaks things. Something cannot appear broken to one observer, but unbroken to another. How about if the perpendicular curl component of the electromagnetic force triggered a light switch? Could the light appear on to one observer but off to another?
The relationship between force and velocity is very clear in the case of angular velocity. Without angular velocity, there is no centripetal force. What is angular velocity relative to? Imagine a centrifuge in some laboratory. Lets say it creates 10 N of centripetal force by spinning at 60 rpm relative to the floor of the laboratory. The laboratory itself, as part of a larger experiment, is mounted on a giant turntable. If the motor driving the centrifuge is turned off so the centrifuge is motionless relative to the laboratory floor, and the turntable is made to rotate the entire laboratory at 60 rpm relative to the earth, the force felt by the contents of the centrifuge is unchanged. It makes no difference whether the centrifuge spins inside the laboratory, or the entire laboratory spins, the centripetal force and the angular velocity of the centrifuge are the same in both cases.Taking angular velocity to be relative to the earth suffices for many purposes, but what about angular velocity in outer space? What is it relative to? This illustrates the problem with measuring angular velocity relative to something else, which may also be rotating. Since the relation between angular velocity and centripetal force, Fc=mrω2, is the same, regardless of the location, whatever it is relative to would have to be an absolute or fixed direction(s) or framework that applies to all rotary motion.
Acceleration, as represented by Newton’s law, F = MA, is another relation between force, and velocity. Acceleration is change in velocity, so if something is accelerating, it has velocity. However, the magnitude of the acceleration and resulting force does not depend on the velocity relative to any particular observer. The acceleration of a car on the freeway will be the same, whether measured from another car going 30 km/h or from one going 95 km/h, and the driver will feel the same force of acceleration regardless of the state of motion of any observer with a constant velocity. Acceleration does not need an observer but it does need a cause –
Acceleration is caused by force, and force is caused by acceleration. For force to exist, there must be two things for it to act between. Things cannot accelerate themselves; an external force is required. Simply put, there needs to be a push, pull, or twist, between two things for force and acceleration to exist. Another requirement for force to exist is that the two things that the force acts between, resist acceleration or movement. If something can move freely, it takes no force to move it. A locomotive is unable to exert much force on a balloon because it has little mass and nothing to hold it in place. The locomotive could however, apply substantial force to something massive such as a freight car. This resistance to movement or change of state of motion of something with mass was elucidated by Newton as his first law of motion, and has been popularly explained by a mysterious phenomenon called inertia. It is inertia that is responsible for the centripetal force generated by rotating or orbiting objects. This phenomenon of matter which causes it to resist acceleration, apparently without anything external to hold it in place, has historically been regarded as something that just IS, an inherent quality of matter with no deeper explanation. The explanation currently in vogue is that it is caused by some submicroscopic particle in some mysterious fashion. However, the view that inertia is due to external factors is more in line with our human experience, which shows that the reason things resist being put in motion, is because they are being held, or their motion resisted, by something else. What could this something else be? What is needed to explain the workings of our physical universe, is something that provides a reference or scale that all velocity shares, fixed directions that all rotation shares, and a means for motion to create force.
So, what is this something? Let us imagine a Cartesian coordinate system with three mutually perpendicular axes. A Cartesian coordinate system can be thought of as a lattice formed of cubic cells, with each side of a cube equal to the smallest division of the coordinate system. Let us imagine this lattice of coordinates as extending to infinity in all directions (or bounded?) from any arbitrarily chosen origin. Things have relative velocities to each other, but each thing also has an absolute velocity relative to this cosmic measuring stick. Everything that we can detect the existence of, has a state of absolute motion relative to this cosmic coordinate system. Everything that appears motionless to an observer is moving at the same speed as the observer relative to this cosmic lattice, and everything that appears to be in motion is moving at a different speed relative to the cosmic lattice, than the observer.
Click to view contributions to this section
So far, the cosmic lattice that we have been discussing has been an imaginary construct. It provides no means of fixing and comparing distance.. What is needed is a real physical manifestation of the above-described imaginary lattice. Such a physical lattice would need to be imperceptible to our senses, allow objects to move, and have no net electrical charge. It would have to behave like, and have the characteristics of, what we know as “vacuum of space”.
Something that could exist in nature that would fulfill those requirements, and be a physical representation of a Cartesian coordinate system, is a cubic lattice, with elementary electric charges at each vertex. The lattice structure is maintained by alternating attractive and repulsive interactions between the charges, which holds them equidistantly in place. The lattice extends infinitely in all directions or far enough to encompass everything.
The distance between charges held in this lattice must be very small, so that the lattice behaves sort of like a homogeneous fluid (although it would be more accurately described as a solid). As a consequence of the small distance between charges, the force between charges must be enormous, so it would require enormous forces to significantly deform the lattice.
Click to view contributions to this section
Electromagnetism and the Lattice
At each vertex of the lattice, there is a single charge. The lattice structure is maintained by alternating attractive and repulsive interactions with neighboring charges.
A charge is a spherical field, with a maximum density at the center, and with decreasing density according to the inverse square of the distance from the center. The field that constitutes the charge is infinite in extent but becomes very weak (very low density) with large distance from the center of the charge.
The charges are all inherently the same, but adjacent charges are spinning with opposite orientations. Whether a charge is seen as “positive” or “negative” depends on the orientation of the spin of the charge. Charges spin around all three coordinate axes, in both orientations.
The fields of the charges have the capability of exerting linear force and torque on each other. The mode of force transmission can be thought of as a sort of rubbing or friction between the spinning fields of the charges, with some amount of “slip”. This “slip” or reduction in transmitted force could be quantified by a sort of friction-like factor.. The magnitude of this factor depends on the density of the combined fields of the two charges over the volume of their overlap, which varies inversely according to the square of the distance between the charges, between the limits of 1, which represents full transmission of force, and 0.
Ts = Tp(R) 0 < R < 1 where Tp is the torque exerted by the primary or driving charge, Ts is the torque received by the secondary charge, and R is the friction factor.
Attraction and repulsion between charges is created by interaction between the spinning fields of the charges. In the case of attraction, consider two charges spinning with opposite orientations to each other. We can visualize this as two wheels spinning in opposite directions in the same plane. If we rivet the two wheels together at a point on their perimeters, the torque driving the wheels manifests itself as a linear force pulling the centers of the wheels together. In the case of repulsion, the wheels are spinning with the same orientation. If these wheels come in contact with each other, they will be driven apart.
The situation with two spinning charges differs from this ideal wheel model in that instead of a firm attachment between the charges, the force that one charge exerts to the other depends on the “friction” between the fields of the two charges. This permits an amount of slippage between the fields that reduces the linear force of attraction or repulsion. It is more like what results when two spinning brushes come into contact.
The angular velocity of all the lattice charges is very close to the same, since all the charges of the lattice serve to drive the spin of any individual charge and vice versa. Lattice charges maintain their constant spins by torque exerted on each other. This torque is subject to very little slippage because of the close proximity of the lattice charges to each other. The spin of the lattice charges may be due to friction produced by the translational motion through them of charges contained in matter, which would be transmitted to all lattice charges due to their close proximity.
Free charges that are not part of the lattice structure, but are travelling through the lattice in translational motion, acquire spin by means of their interaction with each other, and with the lattice. A diagram of a lattice cell will help to illustrate how this occurs:
When a charge is put in translational motion, it passes closer to some lattice charges than others. The spin of a lattice charge that it passes closer to, will apply a greater torque to the moving charge, than will a charge with opposite spin that is farther away, due to greater overlap of the fields. Once the moving charge has acquired spin as a result of the first unbalanced interaction with a lattice charge, it is attracted or opposed by the lattice charges depending on their spin orientation. The moving charge will be attracted by a lattice charge with opposite spin, and will therefore pass closer to it than to the charge on the opposite side of the lattice cell with the same spin which repels. The spins of the lattice charges that it passes closer to, apply a torque to the moving charge that is not completely offset by that of opposing charges at a greater distance. The lattice charges that the moving charge is attracted to, and passes closer to, are those with spin orientations opposite to that of the moving charge.
Each of these unbalanced interactions with the lattice charges provides an incremental torque with the same orientation on the moving charge. The total torque that a moving charge receives is therefore directly proportional to its velocity:
total torque per time = (torque from each interaction)(interactions per unit distance)(velocity).
Charges in translational motion with a parallel component to each other in the same direction, acquire spin with opposite orientations, from the lattice. If the spin of both charges had the same orientation, they would exert opposing torques on each other due to drag between the charge fields. By spinning in opposite orientations, the drag between the fields of the two charges causes the torques of the charges to reinforce each other. Charges in translational motion with a parallel component to each other in opposite directions, acquire spin with the same orientation. As the charges move past each other, the drag between their charge fields due to this translational motion, causes them to exert a torque in the same direction on each other.
Translational motion through the lattice imparts spin or torque to a charge around all three coordinate axes or orthogonal planes. Torque in the plane orthogonal to the direction of motion is produced in a manner similar to bevel and miter gear sets, as in the diagram below:
Drag between the rotating fields of the charges in the plane that is perpendicular to the direction of motion, causes curl; a torque that each charge exerts on the center of the other charge, causing the two charges to try to rotate around each other as in the following diagram:
When current flows through a wire that runs through the center of a coil or solenoid, the spin of the charges along the axial wire, in the plane perpendicular to the wire, drags the charges of the coil windings in the same direction as the spin of the charges in the axial wire. When the current in the wire is reversed, the direction of the spin is reversed, so the charges are dragged in the opposite direction. The curl torque that one charge exerts on the other is simply Ts = Tp R where R is the resistance or “friction” factor.
Force or torque, and relative velocity are related. A spinning charge can only exert torque with the same orientation on a receiving charge that is spinning at a lower angular velocity. Where Wp is the angular velocity of the primary or driving charge, and Tp is the maximum torque that can be exerted by the primary charge, The torque received by the secondary charge is:
Ts = Tp ( Wp – Ws)/ Wp .
A charge with a greater angular velocity of spin is therefore more capable of exerting torque on other charges, than a charge with lower angular velocity. Voltage is a measure of this angular velocity of spin. When a wire is connected across a voltage, what we think of as current is actually torque or spin being transmitted from one charge to the next along the wire, rather than any translational motion of the charges.
Macroscopic objects, being aggregates of multiple charges, behave similarly to individual charges, and can experience attraction, repulsion, and curl with other objects or aggregates of charge by the same mechanisms as individual charges.
Click to view contributions to this section
Gravity and Mechanical Phenomena
The mechanism by which gravitational force is produced is Field Alignment: of the fields of spinning charges. The fields of opposite sign charges in matter that attract tend to align with each other, while the fields of same sign charges that repel, try to avoid each other, resulting in a net attraction.
Charges in mass or matter (even that which is electrically neutral) acquire spin from their interactions with the spinning lattice charges, and interactions with each other. The attraction that we know as gravity is due to self-alignment of the fields of charges with opposite spins that are present in mass. The fields of charges with the same spin orientation try to avoid each other because they repel. This means that the fields of charges with spins with opposite orientation (which attracts) interact more strongly than than those of charges with the same spin orientation (which repels), resulting in a weak net attraction that we know as gravity. The simplest example of this is the case of two electric dipoles. Both are of course net electrically neutral, containing one positive charge and one negative charge. When they interact with other, the charges align so that opposite charges are closer together and same charges are farther apart, resulting in attraction between the two dipoles. Even in rigid structures comprised of many charges, the charge fields are able to arrange themselves so that contact between fields that attract each other is greater than that between fields that repel each other, resulting in gravitational attraction.
Interaction between the lattice, and charges in matter, accounts for the mechanical phenomenon of inertia, and force due to acceleration –
When charges that comprise matter move through the lattice, they cause a slight displacement of the lattice charges which they travel between, due to the attractive and repulsive interactions. Force must be exerted by the traveling charge to cause this displacement. The force required to displace the lattice charges in front of the traveling charge is equal to the force applied to the back of the traveling charge by the lattice charges returning to their equilibrium positions behind the traveling charge as it passes. For a charge moving at a constant velocity, this equality of the forces acting on the front of the charge, and on the back of the charge, maintains the constant velocity. If the traveling charge is accelerating however, the force applied by the front of the moving charge to the lattice charges it encounters in the direction of travel is greater than the force applied to the back of the moving charge by the lattice charges behind the moving charge, returning to their positions after the moving charge has passed. This is because the accelerating charge “outruns” the force provided by the lattice charges returning to their equilibrium positions behind it. This is why the lattice resists the acceleration of charges moving through it, but maintains the velocity of charges moving at a constant velocity.
An object or mass containing charges can be “superimposed on” the cosmic lattice because the lattice is electrically neutral everywhere due to the close alternating arrangement of the charges. Matter however, contains charges in a myriad of complex arrangements, so that two masses cannot be superimposed because of strong electrical forces that result. When one mass/charge encounters another, rather than superimposing or occupying the same space, a collision occurs. This results in deceleration of one mass and acceleration of the other, effectively transferring velocity. This is the mechanical phenomenon of conservation of momentum.
Click to view contributions to this section
Electromagnetic radiation is simply vibrations or waves propagating in the medium of the universal lattice in a very similar manner to how sound waves propagate. EM radiation propagates in the medium of the lattice as longitudinal traveling waves comprised of alternating zones of greater and lesser density or pressure as is the case of sound.
For an example of how waves can be created in the medium of the lattice, consider an alternating current in a wire, or a current in time-separated “spurts” such as might be found in a circuit with a capacitor that cyclically charges and discharges. According to the Universal Lattice Theory concept of current, it consists of a chain of spinning elementary charges, with each charge applying torque to the next adjacent spinning charge in the chain. In the case of alternating current, the orientation of the torque on the charges in the chain (wire) alternates between clockwise and counterclockwise with each change of polarity of the current. Between each change of current polarity, there is an instant when the charges in the chain experience no torque in either direction as the orientation changes.
The spin of the charges in the chain or wire affects the spin of adjacent lattice charges due to “friction” between the spinning fields of the spinning charges. Torque which changes the spin of a charge in the wire also changes the spins of adjacent lattice charges. This torque on the lattice charges is of the same orientation as the torque on the charge in the wire. Since the spins of all the lattice charges adjacent to a charge of the wire are torqued with the same orientation, that of the torque on the charge on the wire, their spins are all changed toward the same orientation. Recall from the earlier section “Electromagnetism and the Lattice”, that charges with opposite spin orientation attract each other, but those with the same orientation repel. Therefore applying torque with the same orientation to the lattice charges either increases the degree that they repel each other, or lessens the degree to which they attract each other. This causes them to move apart from each other. Then when the torque being applied to them by the charges in the wire ceases as it does in between current alternations or “spurts”, they return toward their equilibrium positions. This results in alternating expansion and contraction of the lattice charges adjacent to the wire, producing a longitudinal traveling wave similar to a compressional sound wave. The wavelength of the wave is the distance between contractions or expansions.
When this longitudinal compression or displacement wave encounters matter, one of three things, or usually some combination thereof occurs:
1) The wave is reflected or refracted.
2) If the matter has some degree of transparency to the frequency of the wave, it passes through the matter with some loss of energy depending on the degree of transparency. This energy loss typically is manifested as heat, and/or by the creation secondary traveling waves at harmonic frequencies.
3) The wave can be trapped (absorbed) in the matter as a standing wave(s).
In the first case, that of reflection, the wave encounters lattice charges which are so strongly held or stabilized at an equilibrium angular velocity by nearby charges that comprise the matter, that the wave is unable to accelerate the spins of the matter charges to a significant extent. This diverts the wave away from the matter to a direction in which there is less resistance to acceleration of the lattice charges so it can continue to propagate. It is sort of an elastic effect because the angular velocity of the lattice charges that comprise the wave is reduced when the wave encounters the reflecting matter, causing them to expand apart from each other, resulting in a sort of elastic rebound in the new direction according to the well-known mechanical principles of wave reflection.
In the second case, that of transparency, the arrangement and spacing of the charges that comprise the matter that the wave encounters is such that they do not completely inhibit the acceleration of the spins of the lattice charges by the accelerating wavefront. The spacing is also such that they do not allow the formation of a standing wave or resonance.
In the third case, that of absorption, the charges comprising the matter are spaced so that the matter allows the formation of standing waves that trap the incident wave. This is the case when the distance of half a wavelength is an even multiple of the distance between the charges that comprise the matter. This trapping of certain frequencies is responsible for the colors seen by the human eye. With continued energy input to a trapped or absorbed standing wave, the excess energy becomes mostly heat, however in some materials, the standing wave may continually decay into harmonic traveling waves, resulting in the phenomenon of fluorescence. The phenomenon of phosphorescence may result in certain materials, if after energy input to the standing wave ceases, the standing wave decays into harmonic traveling waves over a finite time period. The amount of wave energy called a “photon” is directly proportional to the frequency corresponding to the wavelength of a traveling wave that is absorbed by matter as a standing wave, or the frequency of an emitted traveling wave resulting from the decay of an absorbed standing wave.
Light (EM radiation) has a characteristic velocity in the medium of the lattice, known as “C”, which is analogous to the characteristic velocity of sound in air, known as “Mach 1”. This velocity is very rapid, approximately 299792458 km/sec. The reason why this velocity is so rapid is because the velocity of a longitudinal wave depends on the bulk modulus of the medium it is propagating in. The bulk modulus is a measure of rigidity, and the universal lattice is more rigid than any matter can possibly be.
Velocity is traditionally represented as a change in distance divided by time
V = ∆X/∆T
Distance in this new theory is measured as if the lattice vertices were those of a three-dimensional coordinate system. The meaning of time, that most useful of human inventions, in this theory is simply an observed change that is believed to be regular. Velocity, for example, could be represented as the ratio of a change in distance to how many times the hand of a clock has rotated, so:
V = (change in distance)/(cycles of regular event)
The velocity of electromagnetic radiation, C, has been found to be independent of the motion of the emitting source, and of the observer. All experiments intended to measure the propagation velocity of light have resulted in the same number. How is this possible? The observed constancy of the speed of propagation light or electromagnetic (EM) radiation, can be explained simply by:
– There is no significant net movement of the medium in the direction of wave propagation. When a traveling wave propagates through a medium, water for example, nothing actually flows or travels through the medium like bullets shot from a gun or a stream of something. When one snaps a whip, a wave travels along the whip in a forward direction, and any observer traveling at any velocity will measure the same length of time that it takes the wave to reach the end of the whip. The whip itself does not move forward.
– Something that is massless, such as a wave, acquires no momentum from the velocity of whatever emits it, so the velocity of the wave is independent of the velocity of the emitter.
Click to view contributions to this section
An implication of this theory is that matter, at some level, must be comprised entirely of electrical charge. It may be that the particles that matter appears to consist of, are stable arrangements found by random assemblages of charge.
Where did these random assemblages of charge originate from? A possibility is that they were blown loose from the lattice by a very energetic event. If charges are blown loose from the lattice, this would be accompanied by a very large release of energy. The danger that a man-made event could precipitate such a release is concerning.
Maybe supernovae create matter by blowing charges loose from the lattice, while black holes are a reverse process that compresses charges back into the lattice, resulting in a steady-state universe. Supernovae may result when a black hole tries to add matter to the lattice at too fast of a rate, resulting in a tear or disruption of the lattice, and an accompanying release of some of the enormous energy contained in the lattice. Momentum imparted by supernova explosions could be the primordial source of the translational velocity of matter and the spin of electric charges. Such a universe would never need to have a beginning or end.
Some general observations can be made about matter as viewed by the Universal Lattice Theory:
It may be not be completely accurate to view solids as comprised of individual atoms or molecules. They do not behave as such. Solids do not generally bind or participate in chemical reactions without the presence of something in a liquid or gaseous phase. Discrete solids comprised of identical materials such as pure Fe atoms in the form of two pieces of iron do not combine or adhere to each other while both are in the solid phase with no intermediate in a liquid or gaseous phase. There is no theory of chemical bonding between atoms and molecules that satisfactory explains why solids are so “solid” – why a rock isn’t just a pile of molecules (or loose crystals), or why it requires a great deal of force to separate a pure iron bar, or even a wooden board into two pieces.
Heating a solid sufficiently will of course cause it to change phase to a liquid or gas. Both liquids and gases are almost indisputably comprised of discrete particles which could be considered as the classical atoms and molecules. Likely these particles are the result of the solid phase breaking into pieces along structural weaknesses in the solid, and/or pieces which have similar structure – sort of like when you crumble a chocolate chip cookie you will have two types of pieces, chocolate chips and crumbs.
As discussed above, the Universal Lattice Theory views matter as being comprised entirely of elementary electric charges. There are two aspects of assemblages of charges that the properties and behavior of matter can be attributed to:
First, there is the three-dimensional arrangement of the charges. The smallest stable arrangement (a “triad”) is a linear structure with three charges in a row, with the two outside charges being of the same polarity, and the charge on the inside being of opposite polarity. This is a charged ion. Real-world ions likely include one or more of these charged triads incorporated in or attached to an otherwise neutral structure. There is a large, if not infinite, number of stable, electrically neutral, arrangements of charges that are possible. They can for example, form long chains of charges with alternating spin orientations, but if these chains become longer than a certain length, they may form loops in ahead-to-tail fashion and these loops can even form multiple loops in three dimensions up to a sort of ball-like configuration. There can also be all manner of branching chains in three dimensions and branching chains can extend from loops. Very reactive elements may have chains with”naked” ends in which the end charge is adjacent to only one charge with opposite spin orientation, and therefore has a strong attraction to another charge with opposite spin orientation that is part of an atom or molecule that it reacts with. Unreactive atoms like noble gases may have ring configurations, thus little affinity for themselves or other atoms or molecules. It is to be expected that denser elements such as metals have structures in which the charges are more closely packed than in lighter elements. This close-packing of charges probably contributes to the greater electrical conductivity of metals, since it is easier for spin to transfer from one charge to the next when the charges are closer together.
It may be impossible for human intelligence to arrive at combinations of charge structure and spin to explain all properties and behaviors of all elements of matter. Most likely it will require the use of computers and artificial intelligence to achieve this.
Click to view contributions to this section
Magnetic properties of matter can roughly be explained as follows: The charges that comprise matter are capable of spinning in three planes simultaneously. However spin in only two planes is all that is required to maintain the three-dimensional structures of charges that we perceive as matter. Matter with only a low or background spin in the third plane (called the “magnetic plane” herein), not involved in maintaining the structure of the material, is regarded as unmagnetized. Materials whose structure allows free or relatively free spin in the third plane (ferromagnetic, ferrimagnetic, paramagnetic, and diamagnetic) can acquire spin in this third plane which is perpendicular to the two structural planes, from a material that has spin in the third plane, and is therefore “magnetized”. Spin from the fields of the charges of the other magnetized material, or from charges moving through the lattice, can therefore induce magnetism, which is spin in the third non-structural plane, in other nearby materials. In some materials, the spin in the third plane may persist because the charges are free to spin without drag or impediment, thereby forming a permanent magnet. In other materials, there may be drag on the spin in the third plane so that the magnetism dies off when the source of the spin is removed. It is expected that there are differences in the susceptibility of charges to having spin induced in the magnetic plane, both within a particular substance, and varying from substance to substance. This would depend on how tightly or loosely the spin in the magnetic plane is held by the arrangement of surrounding charges. In the Universal Lattice Theory, electric polarity is a relative thing. This view however. does not satisfactorily explain what happens in an electrochemical cell. If we place a source of electromotive force in the middle of a length of wire, and then place both ends of the wire in a solution containing ions, we would find that “positive” ions are attracted to one end of the wire, while “negative” ions are attracted to the other end of the wire. This presents a problem for the picture of electric current described above as being transmitted from charge to charge in the same plane as the axis of the wire. The spin of charges at either end of the wire would have the same orientation relative to the axis of the wire, so both ends of the wire would be electrically identical. Additionally, an ion with a “naked” charge could simply flip so that the spin orientation of the naked charge is opposite that of the charges in the wire, so that there is no reason why an ion should be preferentially attracted to one end of the wire or the other. We therefore must reject electric polarity as being the source of ionic attraction.
Noting that magnetism is above described as being spin in the plane perpendicular to the wire, and that all the charges in the wire must be spinning in the same direction in this plane to account for the wrap-around magnetic field of the wire, we can see that the charges at each end of the wire will be spinning with opposite orientations in the magnetic plane relative to the solution in which they are immersed. Thus, magnetic attraction could explain how positive and negative ions are preferentially drawn to opposite ends of the wire.
The aspect of matter that explains its electronegativity, electropositivity, or electrode potential could be the angular velocity of the charges that comprise the matter, with differences in angular velocity representing differences in electronegativity. In a Galvanic cell, current will flow between two materials with differing electronegativity as the angular velocity of the charges of the two materials tries to equalize. Gain or loss of angular velocity of the charges can affect the materials, resulting in the corrosion and deposition seen in electrochemical reactions.
Contribute to this section
Click to view contributions to this section
The ecliptic planes of the orbits of planets in our solar system have been seen to be to a high degree, co-planar. Astronomical observations have shown that this co-planarity extends not only to the plane of our Milky Way galaxy, but to large areas of the universe as well.1 Arguably, existing theories offer no good explanation of this. The magnetic curl generated by velocity relative to the background lattice, is however, a perfect explanation.
Gravitational “lensing” could be explained by a slight distortion of the lattice caused by the electromagnetic interaction of the charge contained in massive objects, with the lattice charges.
Click to view contributions to this section
1. “A vast, thin plane of corotating dwarf galaxies orbiting the Andromeda galaxy” – Rodrigo A. Ibata, Geraint F. Lewis, Anthony R. Conn, Michael J. Irwin, Alan W. McConnachie, Scott C. Chapman, Michelle L. Collins, Mark Fardal, Annette M. N. Ferguson, Neil G. Ibata, A. Dougal Mackey, Nicolas F. Martin, Julio Navarro, R. Michael Rich, David Valls-Gabaud & Lawrence M. WiAdrow – Nature 493, 62–65