Cook's New Electrogravity Theory: the NET.13

After the connection between Myron's ECE and Bayles Electrogravity Theory have been solidly made, Cook moved forward into defining solid explantions of the Jeff Cook Effect, superconductivity, gravity and zero point energy.

If you have made it through the NET this far, and grasped most, if not all of it, then you can rightfully consider yourself a NET Bachelor. And if you can pass these next pages, then you might be able to consider yourself a NET Master.

What is so different in what will follow that is so much advanced that only graduated Bachelor's can handle, you may ask? Well, the next items up for bid are some of the most controversial and most hated subjects in theoretic physics today. Huh? Your required reading, however, before you really should move forward would need to be the Relativity & the NET pages. If you have already read these pages, great, then feel free to move forward.

These next topics must begin with the ugly concept of the Tachyon.

Isn't this tachyon garbage just science fiction, Star Trek stuff?

No, not really. It was actual physicists who first came up with the notion of these particles, namely the German physicist Arnold Sommerfeld, of which the Hollywood writers later expanded upon the interesting properties of this proposed particles.

So what is a Tachyon, one might ask? Well, it is simply any object that travels faster than c, and standard physics considers this agreeable with Relativity already. A particle is technically allowed to travel faster than c if it always has been traveling faster than c. Which is why these tachyon's are often such hated topics. Humans naturally dislike the concept of always, whether it means from its own origin, the origin of the universe or the origin of time or all of the above. It's simply a very non-scientific concept in a lot of people's minds. However, if you have read the Relativity & the NET pages, you may now realize that the NET indeed allows an object to be accelerated above c, so this ugliness disappears...kind of.

So, is a tachyon a particle? It could be. But it also could be a high velocity space craft or perhaps even a jogger under the influence of 10+ Red Bulls. Point made simple, a tachyon is any form of matter traveling at a velocity > c. Thus, if we accelerated an electron faster than c, it would become tachyon, yet, it would still have all the characteristics of an electron from its POV. It's all just semantics and not really good terminology perhaps.

In any case, this is how all this comes into play. You likely remember all about the Phase Velocity discussed in the past pages. The Phase Velocity was originally considered by de Broglie some phase value needed for the wave to keep up with the ray. And since it carries no information, there is no break in the laws of physics if it can be accelerated > c. Well, the NET changes the definition of this Phase Velocity carrying "no information" to "it can not convey information to an object traveling < V_f + c / i relatively." However, the two are still connected via a dimensionless X-Wave. If you are confused, I assume all responsibility in my description, 'cause it's actually quite simple if put another way. If an electron orbits the Hydrogen's nucleus, and it's velocity is considered V_g, then what must be orbiting an electron for it's velocity to be V_f? One might suppose it would have to be referred to as "a Tachyon."

But does anything really orbit an electron? Do we have any evidence for this?

Well, if we didn't have a tachyon orbitting the electron, then everything in the NET, everything that has been presented so far, everything about ECE and Bayles Electrogravity and even the Jeff Cook Effect itself would be completely false and non-existent. All of it, and I do mean all, comes right down to what is about to be presented.

If lambda_es is the wavelength of the electron spin and lambda_eo is the wavelength of the electron orbit, then what is the product of the two? Well, we would know from Cook's Physics 101 class, that whenever two values of distance are multiplied to become area, the two original distances fall perpindicular to one another. Thus, one could perform the following calculation.

Where B_r and e_r are the Bohr radius and electron radius respectively.

At n = 1:

S_aH = 5.8872947 E-24 m^2

Thus, taking (81) into consideration, if (B_r + e_r) is considered an outer radius and (B_r - e_r) is considered an inner radius, then what we have here is the equation for the surface area of a toroid. And these equations are in regard to the Hydrogen atom, which is identical to what Bayles found at the zero point of n = 0 in relation with f_LM and the electron. I wonder if you would be surprised also if I told you that this too is the equation for the shape of the Graviton in String Theory as well--a toroid.

Huh, I thought the Hydrogen atom was spherical?

In Plasma Physics it is well known that when a plasmoid travels through two fields, the result is a curved motion. Your kitchen microwave oven utilizes this principle with an electric and a magnetic field. However, at the atomic level, there is just one additional important field present: gravity. Indeed, in terms of the NET, the electron spin dictates the electric field of Hydrogen and the orbit dictates the gravitational field, while the magnetic field dictates the toroid area to spin as well, thus creating a sperical area of the electron's travels. But for any of this to make any mathematical sense, one needs to accept that there is a smaller charged particle orbitting the electron, which can interact with the Hydrogen's magnetic field, as there is nothing inherent to a such a reaction without taking this into consideration. And this so-called tachyon would need to have a relativistic value of c that would appear quite different from an outside observer. In fact, this relative c, a "blasphemous" blow to Einstein's conclusions of his own theory, can easily be calculated using the work presented thus far from the NET.

At n = 1:

c' = 5.6297621 E+12 m s^-1

And if we even could observe the speed of light at this value, which we cannot, from the tachyon's POV it just appears the same as c does to us. What this important notion indeed does is open the door for all attributes of the tachyon, and thus the electron and hydrogen atom, to be calculated with precision.

At n = 1:

q_t = 2.1955586 E-17 C

Which gives the following formal identity to the energy of the electron spin.

At n = 1:

E_es = 1.5374453 E-09 J

Which is possibly a bit curious, but really only just the beginning. We need to move forward with Cook's work further to see yet how all things come into play at the singularity.