Jean de Climont


















Jean de Climont









© Assailly, 2007, 2012 & 2018

ISBN: 9782902425020



Crédit photo : NASA









INTRODUCTION                                                                                               7

                 FIRST PART             ETHER


Chapitre    I                       Constitution principle                                                   10

Chapitre    II                      The nature of aether                                                    15

Chapitre    III                    Matter                                                                         19


                 SECOND PART        GRAVITATION


Chapitre    I                       Equations of fluids with angular moment           23

Chapitre    II                      Newton's law                                                             32

Chapitre    III                    Galaxy rotation                                               37

Chapitre    IV                    Solar system                                                               41

Chapitre    V                     Angular moment pumping                                            46


                 THIRD PART            LIGHT


Chapitre    I                       Aether wave                                                                49

Chapitre    II                      Polarisation of light                                                       52

Chapitre    III                    Propagation of light in space                                         55

Chapitre    IV                    Electromagnetic effects of aether waves            59




Chapitre    I                       Gravitation                                                                   64

Chapitre    II                      Light                                                                            78


FIFTH PART            OBJECTIONS                                                          99









After a period of euphoria, difficulties pile. We certainly can not understand a world so mysterious. We can never hope to know a so strange matter.


Without any doubt, the postulates of modern Science and their consequences do not have the evidence that Descartes required from scientific knowledge. But everything is changed now. Moreover, we think that the difficulty to understand is only the result of novelty. Time will provide for improvement.


Years pass away. Mystery deepens.


Additionally, new hypotheses have accumulated around a few basic postulates. New paradoxes have been added to paradoxes.


However, the high priests of modern Science do not worry about the value of the theories of science, but on the possibility of further increasing our knowledge. Difficulties seem insurmountable. The only intention to examine the foundations of modern Science paradigm is considered fully irrelevant. Questioning the fundamental assumptions would reflect only a total ignorance of scientific data. Should you not have first fully understood the concepts of modern official Science you wouldn’t be allowed to question any part thereof. If, after years of study, you were still questioning, then you are really far from having seized the entire heuristic content of modern Science.


However, what would you think of an architect who plans to increase the number of floors of a building threatening ruin only proposing to strengthen the upper floors, without worrying about foundations?


The value of a theory is measured by its foundations. And we should first understand. Whatever the number of experimental confirmations, if at the outset, nobody understand? The extension of assumptions, the addition of postulates, the addition of paradoxes can not improve knowledge.


Pure Science is based on postulates. But what is a postulate? This is an assumption on the nature of things. It is a mortgage on the understanding.


The metallurgy and fluid mechanics have led to a remarkable improvement of our knowledge in several fields. These engineering techniques are they based on any postulate or axiom? Of course, the engineering techniques do not explain everything. They cover only defined and limited areas.


Why then should postulates be required to understand the colours of flowers and the fall of stones? Why would it not be possible to bring back the knowledge of light and gravity within engineering techniques, in other words, in the experimental sciences?


Why would it not be possible to understand the light and gravity as we understand wind and tide? It seems that those high priests of modern Science want to explain everything. They are seeking for the equation of the universe. Something like the philosopher's stone!


We can understand what we do not know only by what we know. Mix postulates to physics is first denying the right to understand. You may see there a kind of modesty. Why then do they pretend holding the keys of reality?


New bases for light and gravitation are offered in the first part of this book. The consequences for gravity and light are drawn in the following two parts.


The fourth section describes all the experimental results that have had an impact on the knowledge of gravity and electromagnetic waves and give the answers of this theory of space.


Finally, the answers to some objections are presented in the last part.























The constitution principle





Organising may not be the easiest human activity. Watching us could suggest that we spend a lot of time organising. Some businesses make it an exclusive occupation. At the time of the tide, watch women standing in front of their treadmill. Watch them catching the sea breams and hakes, soles and monkfishes! Marvel at how they address each fish in the basket of its kind and size!


Science is probably observing, probably measuring, probably calculating, but it's first storing, first organising, first classifying.


We see things very complex, and other seemingly simple. This is a form of order. The idea is not new. Teilhard de Chardin's thoughts brought him upwards. But what's going on down there?


In this complexity standpoint, starting with what we know of more complex, we find men, cells, macromolecules, molecules, atoms, particles and parts of the particles. Is that all?


There are many phenomena of scale much lower than the particles, and certainly parts of the particles. What to do with light and gravitational fields? They are certainly existing. They shall have their place in this classification.


Thus, what is existing in light, what is existing in gravity, shall exist within parts of the particles, within particles, within atoms, within molecules, within macromolecules, within cells, within men as well


However, we use to call "matter" what is existing within things. Thus, what is existing within the fields of gravitation and the phenomena of light is also "matter".


What is existing in the gravity fields and light is the division in small enough parts of what is existing within things we already know.


This is the constitution principle. This principle does not imply the existence of an ultimate component.


The gravitational fields and luminous phenomena are occurring in space. Thus, it is necessary that space be filled in with a very finely divided matter. This matter is in the form of grains of matter or corpuscles.


I did not find a word to express the dual role of these corpuscles. They flow together. They constitute a kind of fluid flow, like the wind in the air, which causes gravitation. This fluid is also the support of the waves that propagate in space such as light. I would have suggested the word periteion. This word is a contraction, a little distorted for some phonetic reasons of the two Greek words peri, circular, and euteian, straight.


The reader will have guessed an allusion, somewhat ironical, to the theory of bodies and simple motions of Aristotle. In the dialectic world of Aristotle, each simple motion was associated to a very single body. The corpuscles that fill in space, assumed to be constituents of matter, but not ultimate, look like simple bodies of Aristotle. But they have simultaneously the simple motions of the philosopher: the straight motion and the circular motion.


This word periteion is however not so nice. Thus, I prefer to use the word particle of Space.


The particle of Space will be considered exclusively as spherical elastic bodies. This simplification is necessary to allow for using mathematical tools. Particle of Space are not awarded any gravitational or electromagnetic properties. They carry on neither any attraction nor any repulsion. They have neither any associated wave nor any ubiquitous power. They have no probability of presence. They are where they are and cannot be simultaneously elsewhere. These are only elastic corpuscles.


This is an extreme simplification, although the elastic deformations involve adequate internal structure of particle of Space. Of course, we have to think that things are not so simple.


However, there are other phenomena that shall also have their place within the complexity sequence. This is mainly the case of electromagnetic fields. It may be consider that these fields are the manifestation of an even finer matter, which in turn would constitute the particle of Space. We have to place limits if we intend to go forward in understanding. The consequences of this event will not be considered.


Once again, no progress is possible if we don't accept limits. By trying explaining and understanding everything, by trying writing the last page of science, by trying completing history, one is not only exposed to complete failure, but also to the deepest ridicule.


In the same range of ideas, the assignment of absolute properties to phenomena observed in nature is absurd. Because nothing can increase or decrease absolute, nothing can shorten or lengthen absolute. Absolute is final, perfect, exclusive. Assuming something is absolute means giving up to any explanation, without any remedy. It is simply giving an end to science.


The temptation is strong, however. By our mind, we conceive absolute. Youngest children have no trouble thinking a straight line infinitely untied, infinitely long, perfectly straight. They do not worry that nothing like this is given by their perception of nature.


It would be so nice that something perfect, absolute would be perceptible to our senses. We could, in some way, stroke the postulate of Euclid. But that dream of land-surveyor would be a nightmare as well. It would take an infinite time, a double infinite time, to ensure that two parallels do not cross.


So it is perhaps our chance not to have access to infinite, to absolute, to perfection by our perceptions and in our actions. We are able to think to infinite, to absolute, to perfection, but we are far, infinitely far, from reaching infinite, absolute and perfection. Socrates and Plato have shown contradictions, paradoxes, and absurdities resulting from absolute thoughts, even the most attractive. Aristotle, taking the opposite way, by filling the Universe with absolutes, led the human mind into a bottomless abyss.


That is the human condition. At the bottom of the Plato’s cave, men see only shadows, shadow of perfection, shadow of absolute, shadow of infinite, but also shadow of existence, shadow of truth, shadow of reality as well.


Plato, not taking over, looks backwards. He believed discovering the cause of shadows. So did he himself understood Socrates' philosophy, yet he tells us all?


The answer is in the "Sophist". The "foreigner" dominates the dialogue. Who is that foreigner? He raised questions, he analyses, he decides? Is he Plato himself? Did Plato qualify himself as divine? Realities would take shape, so to speak, behind their pictures, the ideas.


But what are finally these realities? Would they be made of that we may imagine and assume? This is trying to take water or sand in one’s hands. These realities are pictures and even images of pictures. Children play to count reflections of two mirrors that face each other. Only imperfect surfaces and parallelism limit their number.


So I do not pretend that particle of Space exist. Not only I do not know their constitution, but also they do not answer the Descartes paradox's.


These corpuscles can not in any way occupy space totally and absolutely. Their constant motions require gap between them. Thus, the extent, the volume, that each occupies should not be confused with the space it occupies at a given moment. So that naught exists where none of them is in this moment. Because space where there is absolutely nothing is naught. According to Cartesian thinking, like the Socratic thought, naught or nothingness cannot exists. This is the supreme irony of the mind, because the idea of naught exists, we can not doubt it.


The absolute vacuum, the naught, do not bother Aristotle. That is, more or less, the balance of his account. A remote adept of this philosophy wrote: "naught carries existence within its heart". He was mixing in a hallucinating shortcut idea and thing, perception and feeling. Wishing to leave the deadly mystery of dialectic materialism, Sartre, the existentialist, gave existence, life and thought to the empty form of relativists, precipitating mind in the depths of absurdity. One will say: provocation! Without doubt, but then, where lies mind? What is thinking?


The particle of Space are minute compared with atoms, much less than minute compared with galaxies. And yet there is still huge space between them. The Cartesian identity of the existence with space is only accomplished at infinite, by the infinitely small. This means that these tiny and hypothetical corpuscles do not approach us from reality. They shall still be divided again and again to fill space. The Descartes' paradox would only be answered in the infinitely small. This paradox is the static counterpart of d'Alembert's paradox: continuum has no action.







The nature of aether





The particle of Space widespread in space form a fluid. To fix ideas, this fluid will be called aether, according to tradition. Aether forms space as the air forms the atmosphere. But it should be noted that particle of Space are everywhere in space, particularly between the nuclei of atoms that leave huge empty space between them. Aether fills space from the nucleus of atoms to beyond the most distant galaxies in the sky.


From the Cartesian standpoint, no reality can reach absolute. In this sense, the extension of the aether is necessarily limited; what is its limit? What is beyond? What is containing aether and our universe of galaxies? These are exciting questions, amazing crowds, but no response is necessary in the context of gravity and light.


This aether can not be a solid as the Lorenz' aether. Aether is a fluid.


The principles used in fluid mechanics and the kinetic theory of gases are considered as fully applicable. This is particularly the case of the principles of conservation of mass and kinetic energy and the principle of Hamilton. Consequently, the theorems of linear moment and angular moment apply. Although the Brownian agitation of particle of Space could have statistical characteristics, varying over time at least in the very long term, this will not be considered. It is certainly a matter of great interest, but no response is needed for the time being. It is also not assigned any temperature to aether.


In fact, principles are used to calculate and predict phenomena, exactly as for air and water, but these phenomena exist and are, with few exceptions, well known in the air and water. Thus, most of the explanations proposed within this book do not depend upon a decision on the value of the principles and mathematical theories. These principles and theories are applied without restrictions to air and water.


However, the equations of aether differ significantly from those of fluids such as air and water. Particle of Space of the aether have a Brownian motion exactly as within fluids we know, but they also have an angular moment that is transmitted during impacts of particle of Space. Their kinetic energy is composed of the kinetic linear and angular energies. A simple, but artificial mean to take into account the angular kinetic energy is to double the term representing the linear kinetic energy in the conventional equations. This intuitive solution was not adopted. The Lagrange's equation has been established directly in polar coordinates, well adapted to the case of axial rotation, taking into account the angular moment of aether and particle of Space. This can be done for conventional fluids, the term relative to the angular moment of fluid particles is, of course, not taken into account in this case. The solutions of this equation for aether are not the same as for conventional solutions. The change results from the angular moment of aether corpuscles, the particle of Space.


Before entering the mathematics aspect, particularly needed to study the gravity, the analogy with air leads to some basic consequences. As a first step, the qualitative aspects of the kinetic theory of gases will be examined.


Aether, like any fluid, has a pressure. This means that any body immersed in aether is subject to a cohesion action resulting from the particle of Space incessant shocks on its surface. As matter is quite empty, the pressure does not act on the surface of the bodies that we perceive. Their surface is a sieve, even worse it is almost transparent to particle of Space. This action occurs only on the surface of the nucleus of atoms and on the surface of particles they are made of. Aether is the cause of the cohesion of particles and nuclei of atoms. This cohesion may be stable only when the internal pressure of the nuclei is lower than the external pressure that shall also balance the electrostatic repulsion. We will see that nuclei have necessarily the structure of bubbles. In addition, the charge is always positive, because a number of electrons are always in the electron cloud around nucleus. The nature of nucleus will be specified further on. The cause of the internal depression itself will be addressed together with the gravity cause. Ultimately, the situation is the opposite of that of soap bubbles. The internal overpressure of such bubbles is balancing both the surface tension and the pressure outside the bubble.


The pressure of aether is certainly variable over time and according to the location in space. Accordingly, aether can be animated by overall motion, similar to winds within the atmosphere.


In addition, the pressure of the aether, as the pressure of all fluids, may also be subject to transitional phenomena. Aether propagates pressure waves.


The speed of propagation of waves of aether is the average square of the speed of agitation of particle of Space. These waves are longitudinal waves, like in air and water.


The angular moment of particle of Space is not involved in the propagation of longitudinal aether waves. But this angular moment is transmitted between particle of Space when they impact. In fact, in the impact of two particle of Space, only the component of their angular moment perpendicular to their common direction of travel can be transmitted. The angular moment component of the angular moment perpendicular to the direction of wave propagation is transmitted during propagation of wave trains within aether. How the angular moment is transmitted? During the impact of two particle of Space, their elasticity allows them to flatten. Flattening stores energy that is returned elastically under the Cartesian laws of shocks. This is not new. But the deformation is made offset and skew during impact by the particle of Space own rotation. The deformation is not plane. The elastic deformation stores both the linear kinetic energy and angular kinetic energy that are returned under similar laws for speeds and rotations. These complex elastic shocks can provide for six degrees of freedom to the fluid corpuscles and kinetic energy exchanges. This is the condition for the implementation of the equipartition principle of energy.


Thus aether waves have a transversal property that propagates with the longitudinal pressure waves. This is the angular momentum transmission.


But particle of Space are tiny elastic spheres. Thus propagation of the aether pressure waves may differ from actual waves fluid consisting of molecules with complex shapes. The waves that form on the surface of the water during the fall of a stone, spread in all directions, forming concentric circles.


The situation is not the same in the air. The sound is much more directional. By putting ones hands in front of the mouth in order to form a kind of funnel, the spreading is limited to a cone. But multiple reflections give the impression that sounds spread in all directions. Just go into an anechoid room to check it is not the case. In these rooms, the walls are covered with a multitude of absorbent prisms so that reflections of sound are virtually eliminated. These rooms have no echo, hence their name. In these circumstances, you can hear somebody speaking only when placed in front of him. The propagation of sound is not spherical, as it has been believed.


The molecules of air are relatively complex. They are not fully independent of each other. The sound is inevitably dispersed.


In the aether, the particle of Space are tiny elastic spheres. The propagation of pressure waves shall have a spreading extremely low compared to that of air. Thus, a train of waves emitted by the motion of an electron shall have the same cross section as the electron. This transverse dimension is maintained on distances the longest the closest particle of Space are to spheres This explains why these waves can have effects that have been attributed to particles such as the photoelectric effect.


Let us now consider an electron jumping over the surface of the nucleus. It will cause the formation of a wave train in aether. This wave train has the cross section of the electron. The duration of these oscillations determines the length of the wave trains. Its wavelength is the amplitude of electron own oscillations.












The nuclei of atoms are floating in aether, should they be in the heart of stars or in parts of space the most deprived of atoms. It is much the same as countless drops of water in a cloud floating in the air. In addition, the drops of water can not exist outside air.


In the same way, the nuclei of atoms can not exist outside aether. Within a rarefied aether, and even more outside aether, nuclei of atoms vaporise into particle of Space.


We know that the size of drops of water is linked to the atmospheric pressure and temperature. Similarly, the size of nuclei of atoms is linked to the local pressure of aether and to their constitution. The nuclei of atoms are made of various components. Thus, there are several types of stable atom nuclei. The pressure of aether maintains the cohesion of the nuclei of atoms by opposing mainly to electrostatic repulsion.


The electrons can not in any way turn around the nuclei of atoms. Aether would inevitably slow them down and they would crash into the nucleus, such as lost satellites crash on Earth.


The electrons can only jump over the surface of the nucleus. This appears to be the cloud observed around the nuclei of atoms. Incidentally, it should be noticed that when an electron has been ejected from a nucleus, the geometric characteristics of the surface of the nucleus are changed until it returns. The nucleus can not eject a second electron in the same conditions. The jump of this second electron ejected before the return of the former will inevitably have other characteristics.



The pressure of the aether may vary over time. Therefore, the stable dimension of particles and nuclei of atoms may vary over time. These variations are sensitive over long periods. Thus, it is highly likely that these dimensions have been in the past very different from what they are today within our Galaxy. The light we receive from galaxies has been sent out under conditions of stability of atom nuclei that may differ significantly from those that characterise our region of space today. Therefore these conditions shall be as much different as these galaxies are remote.


Another type of aether pressure variation exists locally. When nuclei of atoms are moving in aether, they are subject to a greater front pressure.


This pressure excess is perfectly symmetrical in perfect fluids, so there is no drag. This is the d'Alembert paradox. It is expected that aether is obviously not perfect. However, it is assumed that the viscosity of aether is negligible in all the events involved. Stability and thus life of neutrons are increased by this increase of pressure resulting from their motion in aether. This has been established experimentally.


As aether is the cause of the stability of particles and nuclei of atoms, they can in no way exceed the average square of the speed of agitation of particle of Space in aether. Indeed, beyond this speed in aether, no impact of particle of Space could occur on the face of particles and nuclei of atoms in the opposite direction of travel.


Once a nucleus moves in aether, the average speed of particle of Space hitting to its rear is statistically reduced. The reduction is exactly the opposite of the increase that appears on the front side. Depression and overpressure create a drag of nuclei of atoms in the aether. This drag results from the kinetic theory of gases and not from the theory of fluid mechanics. This drag is proportional to the speed of the nuclei in aether, because the average speed of particle of Space hitting the nucleus is changed by the value of the speed of the nucleus in the aether.


In addition, for high speeds, the wave drag is added to the drag resulting from this asymmetry of pressure. Both drags are increasing with the speed of the particle in the aether.



The nuclei of atoms of matter leave huge gaps between them. Thus, aether is flowing through matter more easily than water through a sieve. If the viscosity of the aether is negligible, then the action of aether on nuclei is independent of the position of nuclei in bodies, should they be stones or stars. There is virtually no aether head loss in the flow through matter. The action of aether on bodies is therefore not related to the apparent cross section of bodies, but related to the apparent cross section of all the nuclei that constitute it. This action is proportional to the number of atoms in the body and to the average nucleus cross section.


A very interesting case is the case of nuclei with the structure of bubbles or rings, rather than drops. In the case of bubbles and rings, the cross section is proportional to the mass of the nucleus provided the thickness of the bubbles or rings is the same for all the nuclei. It is also necessary, it is true, that the thickness of the bubbles or tori is the same for all the nuclei. There are actually small variations that explain the mass defect of atoms in relation to the total mass of neutrons and protons that compose them. This phenomenon also explains the difference between the inert mass and the heavy mass which is of the same order of magnitude at 10-24 g.


If these two conditions are met, then the action of a stream of aether on a material body such as a stone or a star as well is proportional to the mass of that body.


The deformation of particles and nuclei of atoms is depending upon their speed in the aether. For low speeds compared to the speed of propagation of waves in aether, nuclei of atoms are flattened under the symmetrical effect of pressure. This is a result of fluid mechanics. For high speeds, they are flattened mainly on the front side. The backside becomes more elongated with the increase in speed.


These deformations are necessarily changing the conditions of ejection of electrons. As a result, the wavelengths emitted by atoms that move through aether are modified in addition to the Doppler-Fizeau effect. This is shown by the Ives and Stilwell experiment. The lengths of the waves emitted in the direction of motion of atoms and in the opposite direction are larger than the wavelengths resulting from Doppler Fizeau effect. Additionally, the nuclei are no longer spherical, thus there is also a change in the waves emitted transversely to the direction of motion of atoms in aether. This phenomenon does not exist in the air.




















Equations of fluids with angular moment

Aether’s equations




The angular moment of particle of Space generates a fundamental modification of the fluid mechanics equations. The reader not familiar with mathematics may jump to the next chapter. He will found a summary of the results of this chapter.


Perfect fluid mechanics equations are first reminded hereafter.



     (Implementation to the 3D whirl-well fluid flow.)

Note : Within these equations, v is the fluid speed at a given point, p the pressure, g the gravity acceleration, r the mass per volume unit, m is the viscosity.


1.1 Continuity




1.2 Eulers’ Equation (perfect fluid) :




1.3 Bernoulli (a long a fluid trickle)




1.4 Energy Conservation (Lagrange’s Equation)


This equation is the same as Bernoulli’s equation, however it is valid over the whole fluid mass.


1.5 Implementation to the whirl-well flow.

Note: Whirls are currently designed as vortices although, strictly speaking, the vortex is only the hollow part in the middle of the whirl.

The Poincare’s theorem is the cause of the concentration of the 3D whirl within the equatorial zone perpendicular to the whirl axis. Integration of (1) gives :



(2) leads to :




Bernoulli’s equation gives :




Equations (3) et (4) give :



The whirl-well flow is irrotational within perfect fluid. This kind of flows is deriving from a potential. Additionally, the pressure is annealed at such a distance rc where :



However, this very conventional and well-known integration gives an infinity of solutions. The minimum energy principle shall be implemented. This principle very currently used within the elasticity theory, whose equations are by the way very similar, is a consequence of the Hamilton’s Principle. One very single solution is acceptable. And this is the solution complying with this principle.


1.6 Minimum energy principle implementation.


Between the instant  - ¥, related to the flow at an infinite distance, and instant tc where the pressure is annealed, the kinetic energy variation, equivalent to the pressure force work, for a fluid particle dm writes :




Along a circle of radius r




k is the flow-rate parameter, so that its value cannot be a condition for the minimum energy. There, one can found only one very single solution for each value of k. The derivation shall then be done with regard to k’ :



The minimum is obtained for 


2 FLUIDS MADE OF PARTICLES WITH ANGULAR MOMENT  Fluid mechanics equations have been established on the basis of some fundamental hypotheses.


It is first assumed that molecules and atoms the fluid is made of have no angular moment. It is no more the case of fluid elements aether is assumed to be made of.


Each aether fluid element is assumed to have 6 degrees of freedom


2.1 Continuity




which gives the very same solution as for perfect fluids :



This relation is the law of fluid flow flux. It means that when there are neither condensations nor evaporation, the mass flux is preserved. As long as the fluid may be considered as uncompressible, the volume flux is preserved as well.


2.2 Angular moment theorem.


The angular moment theorem applied to an elementary volume dv = rdq ds with

 ds = dr dz, writes :


Where I is the moment of inertia of the volume element related to the axis perpendicular to the Poincare’s flow plane including the cylindrical co-ordinate origin, W the local angular speed of the flow.


i is the moment of inertia of the fluid components with regards to the axis perpendicular to the flow plane including their gravity centre and w the rotation speed of the fluid volume elements around this axis. The product of theses two quantities is summed up within the volume element.


The main angular moment may be written in a more usual form :



Then, one may writes :



Frictions are neglected hereafter. In the case of whirl-well, the last equation hereunder becomes :



2. 3 Equipartition Principle.


As a consequence of the energy equipartition within aether, the average mean value of the aether fluid element angular moment is not zero. Within fluids made of elements with 6 degrees of freedom, such as aether, the angular kinetic energy resulting from the rotation of aether within the whirl shall be compensated by an energy contribution. This contribution may only come from available energy in the fluid that is to say from the aether fluid elements themselves. When there are no external forces, the energy equipartition leads to the identity of the instantaneous variations of the angular moment :



then :


§ 2.2 equation becomes :



then :   with  




The pressure is annealed at a distance rc  such as :



It shall be noticed that the well flow is always irrotationnal. It is not the same for the whirl part of the flow. Frictions should then be taken into account. The solution detailed here above is then only valid for speed very low with regard to the Brownian mean quadratic speed of the fluid components; there it is the celerity of light.


Within fluids made of elements with angular moment and 6 degrees of freedom, the rotation energy of those elements is equal to their Brownian agitation speed energy. For these fluids, there is no temperature. Moreover as the friction are neglected for the very slow speeds envisaged for such flows, the energy exchanges needed by the flow are fed by pumping the own angular kinetic energy of the fluid elements.


2.4 minimum energy principle


Between the instant  - ¥  related to the flow at an infinite distance, and instant t, the kinetic energy variation, equivalent to the pressure force work, for a fluid particle dm writes :







k is the flow-rate parameter, so that its value cannot be a condition for the minimum energy. There, one can found only one very single solution for each value of k. The derivation shall then be done with regard to k’ :



The minimum is obtained for


There is only one very single whirl-well flow complying with the minimum energy principle. Nevertheless, it shall be noticed that this single flow is depending upon rc . It is then depending upon the way the well’s flow-rate is established. The parameter of the well flow is k. The well flow without whirl is not possible because it is unstable.



3 Energy Transfer


Within a perfect fluid, it shall be noticed that a fluid element located at the distance r from the well centre, is moving with two opposite rotations. The first rotation is resulting from the overall rotation of the fluid within the whirl. The second is resulting from the tangential speed variation of the whirl between the two extreme parts of the said elements ; i.e. One is the nearest towards the well centre and the other one is the farthest within the same element.


Within perfect fluid whirl-well flows, the angular speed of these two rotation are equal but with opposite signs :




There is then no rotation of the fluid particles. Nevertheless, there is a differential rotation of the fluid particles not corresponding to the conventional model because the Laplacian is zero. Consequently, there are no frictions in the conventional meaning of this word. This flow is said to be irrotational. However, frictions exist as a result of the relative rotation speeds between particles. These frictions have been named angular kinetic frictions. They allow for explaining some anomalies of fluid mechanics against experimental results. This is the case of the heightening of the free surface of the whirl flow in the vicinity of the vortex (the hole in the middle) against the theoretical surface as obtained by the conventional calculations. The same approach allows also explaining the behaviour of the fluid flow around cylinders and the behaviour of helium superfluid within a rotating bucket.


Conversely, within whirl-well flow with angular moment of elements, the angular speed of the overall flow is the opposite of the double of the angular speed resulting from the tangential speed variation:




The result is that an energy transfer is necessary. It has been taken into account within the equations here above. The process of this phenomenon is explained later in this book within the frame of the galaxies rotation curve explanation. This allows for a non-Keplerian explanation of this rotation. It is essential to notice that the Newton’s law is not changed. This law is the very general law of fluxes towards a point. The flow-rate is given. It remains constant whatever is the distance to the well centre. As a consequence the fluid speed towards that centre is always proportional to the inverse of the square of the distance to the well centre


For fluids with element angular moment, it is possible to calculate the order of magnitude of the energy pumped by the whirl from the angular kinetic energy of the fluid elements by integrating the differential rotation kinetic energy as defined here above, between an infinite distance up to the distance R from the well centre :



where l is the number of aether fluid elements per volume unit, i the moment of inertia of aether fluid elements (such as ½ mc²= ½ iw² ) and dz the height of the considered zone.






Newton's law





The introduction of angular moment of particle of Space of aether in the equations of fluid mechanics led to two fundamental results.


In the perfect fluid, and indeed also in real fluids, the tangential speed of the whirl-well flow varies with the inverse of the distance from the wells. Moreover, it follows from the principle of Hamilton that there is only one stable whirl. In particular, the well flow without whirl, without rotation, is unstable.


Within fluids with angular moments, the tangential speed of the whirl-well flow is inversely proportional to the square root of the distance to the axis of the well centre. Similarly, the rotation is imperative.


How not to be deeply amazed by the resemblance between the photograph of a cyclone from space and a photograph of a galaxy? Same spiral appearance, same appearance of the eye. In one case, they are made of clouds, in the other case, they are made of stars.


According to the treaties of official physics, cyclones are due to the Coriolis acceleration resulting from the rotation of the Earth.


However, all the whirling phenomena have not the rotation direction required by scientists. In particular, the rotation direction of waterspouts is perfectly at random. In the same way, the suction vortices of water at the watershed bungholes have not a direction of rotation determined in each hemisphere. It is even possible to obtain two vortices with opposite directions at the entrance of a horizontal evacuation.


Everyone knows that the Strait of Messina has two opposite vortices, one direct and the other retrograde. Without doubt, the vortices of water do not come from condensation as waterspouts and whirlwinds or cyclones. But condensations and aspirations are very similar. Moreover, at a sufficient distance from the zone of condensation, the airflow is an aspiration. The theory attributing the rotation of cyclones to Coriolis' acceleration does not explain the rotation of waterspouts and water vortices, which are similar phenomena.


In fact, the rotation results from the Hamilton's principle.


The demonstration of the previous chapter was done in the case of well flows. One might think finding a similar result in the case of condensation, but the demonstration is sufficient if we take care to consider the flow far enough from the area of condensation.


Thus all whirling flows receive the same explanation. In the case of very large air masses such as those involved in a cyclone, the Coriolis' acceleration is involved in disrupting the unstable flow that occurs at the beginning of condensation. The cause of the rupture always acting in the same way in each of the hemispheres, it is not surprising that cyclones have a rotation determined in each hemisphere. Conversely, for waterspouts and whirls in water, air and water masses involved are very low and the frictions not negligible, so that Coriolis acceleration has no effect. The rotation is perfectly at random.


So if the vortices are the only stable well flows, should they result of a condensation or of an aspiration, the first thing that comes to mind, is that galaxies also result of such a flow. As nothing could disappear, the flow can only come from condensation.


Stars themselves are isolated from each other. They do not satisfy the conditions for making a fluid. If stars are moving progressively closer to the galaxy eye, they can not themselves be the cause of this motion and even less of their rotation within the galaxies.


However, a fluid shall condense to justify the appearance of galaxies. This fluid is aether. One shall think that aether condenses in regions of space where there are galaxies. By analogy with what happens to water vapour in the atmosphere, aether shall condense on existing germs.


Particles made of particle of Space are quite suitable to play this part.


Most particles are gathered in the nuclei of atoms. Thus particle of Space condense within matter. There is a problem of language, as particle of Space themselves are matter. I mean that particle of Space condense in the nuclei of atoms that make up the body that we see.


However, the nuclei of atoms fill a tiny place. Thus those at the centre of stars have almost the same probability of condensing a particle of Space within the same time as those located on the surface of these stars, provided they have the same number of germs that is to say the same particles. But nuclei do not all have the same size. The flow of condensation of aether in a star, or a body, depends on the size and number of atoms that compose it. Moreover condensation is a surface phenomenon. We can therefore say that the flow of aether, which condenses in a body, is proportional to the total surface of the nuclei of atoms it is made of. Nuclei are bubbles as we have seen in the first part. So that the condensation flux of aether is proportional to the mass of nuclei, that is to say to the mass of atoms and finally to the mass of bodies.


The Sun and the Earth as well as all stars in galaxies condense a permanent flow of aether, that is to say a given number of particle of Space. Each star can be considered as a sink of particle of Space. At one point, the speed of the flow of aether, headed toward the centre of a star, is equal to the ratio of the flow rate of aether to the surface of the sphere centred on the star and including that point.


Thus the speed of the flow speed of aether at a point is inversely proportional to the square of the distance from the centre of the star. A body in this flow of aether will be subject to an action from the aether. However, the aether can act only on what exists in the body, i.e. the nuclei of atoms that it is made of. It does not matter whether nuclei are in front or behind compared to the flow of aether. Matter is quite empty. It does not matter at all as well whether the nuclei of atoms of this body condense themselves particle of Space. Condensation in the body is naturally balanced.


We have seen, on the other hand, that the action of a flow of aether on a material body is proportional to the mass of that body and to the speed of this flow.


But in the whirl-well flow, the radial velocity of the flow of aether is inversely proportional to the square of the distance to the centre of the well.


We find the law of Newton. The basic point of the explanation is that matter is quite empty.


However, it is not an universal and absolute law, but merely a located fact. Condensation occurs only in parts of Space where we are seeing galaxies. There the pressure from the aether appears to be sufficient. It is thus possible that in other parts of Space, no condensation may happen, and even more it may occurs, in some parts, some kind of evaporation. This could happen in areas where there is an effect of gravitational lenses without any visible mass, not even in the radiation of wavelengths above and below the visible. This evaporation play exactly the role of a negative mass, which corresponds to one of the explanations, offered by some astronomers.


In addition, condensation of particle of Space in bodies leads to a gradual enlargement of the nuclei of atoms. The light of the stars that reaches us was emitted by atoms that had no reason to have exactly the same size as identical atoms found on Earth at the time of observation. As long as the size of atoms would have an influence on the emitted wavelength, one would have a perfectly clear explanation of the Hubble's effect. But we are still in the fall of bodies.


If a stone falls, this is not the magical effect of I do not know what inherent attraction between bodies, without knowing exactly what bodies. This is only the effect of the flow of a fluid. Aether pushes bodies towards the Earth centre exactly as the wind causes the leaves fall from trees and the river carries stones cluttering his bed.


Finally, the condensation occurs inside the bubbles that make up the nuclei of atoms. The decrease of external pressure resulting from the condensation of aether may be offset by the contribution of evaporation occurring probably in the remote regions of Space. But, lower internal pressure of the aether contained in the nuclei of atoms can not be compensated. So that the internal pressure is maintained below the external pressure and thus allows for the stability of nuclei, taking into account the electrostatic repulsion.


In the fission or fusion, the internal depression disappears, as the surface of the nucleus shall be broken. However, if the condensation of confined aether occurs fairly rapidly, the balance can be found quickly. It is likely that the inside condensation stop since that moment because the internal pressure becomes too low.


As for the absorption and expulsion of electrons, we may think, as we see for soap bubbles, they occur without jeopardising the stability of nuclei. One might also think that the same occurs during fusion and fission provided the rupture of the surface is fast enough so that the internal depression is maintained. A similar phenomenon exists for soap bubbles that can break and form two smaller bubbles.


The condensation of particles in aether led to a progressive enlargement of these particles. Thus the nuclei of atoms and consequently all bodies including stars are progressively expanding. It appears that the planets have a core much denser than the peripheral areas. The core of planets shall grow faster than the less dense surface. The surface of solid planets shall fracture and the expansion excess of the core shall cause a flow to the surface. This is the explanation of earthquakes and eruptions of magma, including granite massifs, volcanoes and granite massifs that have emerged from the bottom of the ancient seas..






The rotation of galaxies





Aether is condensing in the stars of galaxies. Under the principle of Hamilton, this condensation shall take the form of a whirl-well flow. Here, however, occurs a first noticeable difference with cyclones. These phenomena are almost two-dimensional while the condensation in galaxies occurs in three dimensions.


But it turns out that Poincaré was interested in the phenomenon of condensation in a rotating fluid. Aether is in very similar conditions when condensing in stars. The rotation was considered by Poincaré as uniform, also the result of his demonstration applies locally, within zones. The result can be stated as a theorem:


"A fluid mass, initially spherical, condensing and rotating takes a flatter shape the higher is the rotation speed."


Under the Hamilton's principle, the flow of condensation of stars should wind round stars. Under the Poincaré's theorem, the whirl shall tend to concentrate in a plane. This effect will be more sensitive than one will be closer to stars because the rotation speed of the whirl is accelerated. By reason of symmetry, the concentration plane of the whirl contains the centre of the star: this is the equatorial plane of the star or the main plane of the galaxy.


Kepler's laws can only be valid for trajectories included in the equatorial zone of stars and galaxies where the aether whirl is concentrated. In this area, the 1/Ör law of velocity of aether is valid. These are the conditions we have discussed so far. For the Sun, the trajectory characteristics of comets and asteroids are in good agreement with the Kepler's laws when included in the equatorial zone. The zonal distribution of comets and asteroids shows that the equatorial zone of the Sun is limited to 8° each side of the equatorial plane. This zonal distribution is detailed in the next chapter.


But Kepler's laws have a further spectacular limitation in the main plane of galaxies and in the equatorial plane of stars.


One of the conclusions of the previous chapter is that in a whirl-well flow, aether, fluid with angular moments, the angular speed of rotation of the fluid is the double and the opposite of the rotation due to change in tangential speed.


The particle of Space have 6 degrees of freedom, three directions of space for linear speeds and three axes for the rotation speeds around themselves. When two particle of Space impact it happens simultaneously a transfer of linear moment and of angular moment. The transfer rate is depending upon the angle of collision. In stationary aether, a balance is established with equipartition of energy between the degrees of freedom. Within the aether whirls, an average speed tangential and the related angular moment cause a kind of translation of the equilibrium. The degrees of freedom are reduced by one unit. The law of tangential speeds (1/Ör) leads to unbalanced average speeds of impact in the direction of rotation. The difference of local tangential speeds is linked to an angular moment that is transmitted when particle of Space hit one another. This results in a rotation that shall be compensated. Only pumping the own angular moment of particle of Space in their agitation in aether can compensate it.


The result is a gradual reduction of the projection on the axis of the whirl of the own angular moment of particle of Space as they get closer to the well centre, should it be a galaxy or the star. The angular moment is annealed at a distance that can be inferred from the calculations of the previous chapter.


Therefore, there is no other source of energy than the speed of particle of Space itself. The tangential speed can no longer grow. It remains constant. One can understand this phenomenon by examining the impacts of particle of Space within the whirl. If there is no more possibility to transmit an angular moment, collisions are reduced to the case of the kinetic theory of gases. The particle of Space flowing further inside the whirl hit slower particle of Space. Thus, their speed will be reduced. The equilibrium will occur when the speed of aether is constant and therefore without any exchange of energy between particle of Space, on a statistical point of view.


It may happen that aether falls in the conditions of a perfect fluid where the tangential speed is characterised by a law in 1/r and a lack of differential rotation speed. This could explain that the velocity curve of galaxies goes up, sometimes sharply, when getting closer to the centre. Then, the number of stars located closer to the centre decreases and the curve goes down as well. One may observe a solid rotation in this area. This phenomenon occurs in water. This is the result of friction. It is possible that the same occurs in galaxies because of the very high speeds of  particles of Space.


The Sun is in an area where the speed decreases slightly toward the centre of the Galaxy. The angular moment of particle of Space in the direction perpendicular to the cone containing the Sun and centred on the centre of the Galaxy, should be zero.


There is no need to assume the existence of missing masses. The estimated mass of visible stars is only part of the mass of galaxies, the rest being near the centre. The fact that the velocity is constant in a large area is resulting from the pumping of the angular kinetic energy of particle of Space by the rotation of aether whirls.


Newton's law remains generally true as it is relative to the condensation of the aether, the well part of the whirl-well flow. The condensation flow is linked to the available pressure. Once established, the flow rate remains constant in accordance with the principle of conservation of mass. The gravity of a body is the vertical component of the action of condensation aether in stars. It is always inversely proportional to the square of the distance to the centre of the star. But there is nothing enforcing the aether condensation remains always identical. The intensity of the condensation may change from one place to another and also with time.


On the other hand, the tangential speed of stars is complex and is not always complying with the Kepler's laws, as we have just seen. It's the case in a galaxy where such laws do not apply where are the stars. It follows that the balance between aether radial action and the centrifugal acceleration due to the rotation is no longer obtained, i.e. the trajectories of stars are not stable. The tangential speed within the aether whirl becomes keplerian only beyond the farthest stars, they revolve around the galaxy axis slower than they should and the centrifugal acceleration is lower than in a keplerian motion. The stars shall progressively move closer to the centre of galaxies.


The application of the Kepler's laws led to imagine the missing mass or black mass of galaxies. It appears that these laws are valid only in exceptional circumstances. First, they are only valid in the equatorial plane of stars and to a sufficient distance from the axis of the star. In galaxies, they can only be valid at very high distances from their axis. Unfortunately we can not observe any body or gas that would ensure it. Kepler's laws only apply in the case where the phenomena related to the angular moment have no influence on the tangential speed law of the aether whirl. This particular case is exceptional. These laws do not apply to the rotation of galaxies.



Gravity is not an absolute or magical phenomenon that would not be submitted to the changes affecting everything in this universe.







The Solar System





The whirl of a star shall cause the star itself to rotate. The rotation of the stars around themselves was unexplained up to now. However, the stars do not rotate at the keplerian speed on their surface. Their rotation speed is always relatively low.


The aether whirl is a narrow equatorial zone. But outside this whirl, aether is still condensing towards the centre of the star so that the Hamilton principle still applies. Outside the equatorial whirl, the aether shall also rotate. So there are tropical whirls on both sides of the equatorial whirl. The rotation of the equatorial whirl of a star such as the Sun is determined by the rotation of the galaxy that contains it, by Coriolis' effect. This effect is not the cause of the rotation of aether, but it determines the direction of rotation as soon as the fluid masses are important. The equatorial whirl causes eddy areas on each side. The rotation of the two tropical whirls located on each side of the equatorial whirl is determined by the transversal rotations of these eddy areas. The tropical whirls shall be backward compared to the equatorial whirl. In this case, the Coriolis' effect is smaller than the eddy area drags.


This alternation phenomenon repeats itself up to the poles of the star. So that, the rotation speed of the star is the result of actions of all alternated whirls. The equatorial whirl has the largest leverage effect. The moment of its action will generally be decisive for the direction of rotation of the star around itself.


It appears that the gaseous stars can not have an uniform speed. This is particularly true of the Sun and gaseous planets. This is another totally unexplained phenomenon so far.


These alternate structures allow for explaining the appearance of all the zonal gaseous planets. Gaseous planets highlight the zonal nature of gravitation.


The Earth is mainly covered with oceans. But the continents are North-South extensive barriers that prevent the formation of zones within oceans. Ocean currents do not seem to arise from a global phenomenon. There is one exception. The Antarctic Circumpolar Current is continuous. It can in no way be explained by variations in temperature or salinity. The experts focused on the Gulf Stream. This current conditions the climate of Western Europe. The thermal or saline explanations are purely dedicated. There is no reason why similar currents in the Pacific should have another explanation. Moreover, these explanations can not in any way apply to the Antarctic current. It is the trace of the Antarctic whirl of aether around the Earth.


It results from the origin of these currents that they can not disappear for climatic reasons.


The Sun and its planets have whirls. However, the paths of the planets are in planes very close to the equatorial plane of the Sun. They are in the equatorial whirl of the Sun. Those whirls are the composition of a well flow, which causes the law of Newton, and a circular flow. The planets are subject to an action directed towards the Sun from the particle of Space of the aether. The centrifugal acceleration due to rotation around the sun opposes to this action.


However, the planets revolve around the Sun in the direction of rotation of the Sun around itself, thus in the direction of the Sun equatorial whirl. The movement of an object around another may be keplerian only in the equatorial whirl of this star.


This is the case of all the planets and most asteroids. This applies to the Moon and the large majority of planetary satellites. This is the case of most comets. The motion of Satellites, asteroids and comets that are not in these conditions remains somehow undetermined.


For these satellites, asteroids and comets, one shall take into account the actual motion relative to aether. In particular artificial satellites whose paths are too inclined to the ecliptic should have irregularities in their motion due to the passage through the whirls and the composition of their speed with that of the aether outside the whirls. For now, we know that satellites have sometimes quite irregular motions. One is trying to explain these irregularities by abnormalities in the density of the Earth.


Histogram of comet trajectory inclinations against the equatorial plane of the Sun shows that direct elliptic comets are not distributed at random, but in zones. Comets are backward in the gaps. The trajectories are almost flat. Comets cross more and more zones, cones in fact, when the plane of their orbit is more and more inclined to the equatorial plane of the Sun. The phenomenon is observable until approximately 30°.


Curiously, there is neither comet nor asteroid nor planet in the vicinity of the equatorial plane of the Sun up to inclinations of 3°.


I do not explain this gap.


The only two backward elliptic comets have inclination less than 25°. Temple-Tuttle is in the first gap at 12°, and Halley in the third gap at 24 °. There is nothing in the second gap at 19°.


This phenomenon is also valid for parabolic comets and asteroids. There are no backward asteroids with low inclination.


We will see, when studying the polarisation of K corona layer of the Sun, that Kepler's laws are no longer valid at the distance from the Sun where this layer is located. This is due to the pumping of energy of the Sun whirl in the aether, as for the galaxies. The magnitude of the summation of the angular moment, in the solar whirl, on the distance from the K layer to the axis of the Sun, has the same order of magnitude as the very same summation in the Galaxy on the distance from the Sun to the Galaxy centre.


This phenomenon extends well beyond the K layer. So that the motion of planets closer to the Sun should be disturbed. A similar phenomenon occurs with natural satellites turning near their planet. This is the case of Mercury for the Sun and of Phobos for Mars.


Presently physics theories do not assign all of these anomalies to one very single cause. The worst is that there was no explanation for Phobos.


The tangential speeds of aether in whirl-well are those of the stars they drag in rotation. The radial velocity, whose action is the Newton's law, can be estimated from the measurements of Miller to be discussed further. The radial velocity of the flow of condensation of aether in the Sun is 2 km/s at the distance of the Earth. This speed is 40 mm/s for the Galaxy at the distance of the Sun. The radial velocity of condensation of aether in the Earth is over 3500 km/s on its surface.


Aether drives the Earth, like other planets, into the whirl of the Sun. The tangential speeds of the Earth and of aether are equal. There is no relative motion between the aether and the Earth. This is shown by the experiment of Michelson and Morley.


But more precise measurements and especially the measures over a period of several months, made by Miller, show a relative motion of the Earth and aether. This motion has no relation with the rotation of the Earth around the Sun. The relative speed of the Earth to Sun aether whirl changes during the year. The average speed is 7.4 Km/s. However, this speed is the difference between the keplerian speed on the surface of the Earth (7.9 Km/s) and the speed of rotation of the Earth (0.49 Km/s) around itself, both speeds being calculated at the equator.


The change is about + or -2 Km/s around the average. This diurnal variation corresponds to the radial velocity of the whirl-well of the Sun. The extreme values found by Miller occur precisely at 6 hours and 18 hours when the plane of Michelson’s and Morley's interferometer is parallel to the direction Earth-Sun.


This wind of aether on the surface of the Earth is the cause of the anisotropy of Space found by Allais with a Foucault's pendulum mounted on a ball, his famous paraconic pendulum.


The additional anomaly of the orientation of the paraconic pendulum during eclipses of the Sun might show that the interposition of the moon between the Sun and Earth may alter the flow of aether condensation in the Sun.


These phenomena are very small against the vertical aether wind due to the condensation of aether in the Earth. The Foucault's pendulum can not be dragged by the horizontal component of the aether speed. Disturbances due to suspension and friction in the air are much more important than that drag. That is the whole point of the paraconic pendulum. Allais has eliminated the problems of the suspension and minimised friction in the air. In addition, the operating protocol of the pendulum causes a kind of leverage on the influence of other disturbances to be detected.


A century earlier, in 1890, Eötvös and Zeemann had made a vertical torsion pendulum swinging under the influence of gravity of the Earth and the centrifugal acceleration due to its rotation. They have not been able to find any difference. This result is apparently contrary to the results obtained by Allais. It is not. The pendulum of Eötvös and Zeemann is a torsion pendulum. It is symmetrical and therefore can not in any way highlight a transversal phenomenon, which has the same action on the two spheres. In addition, this device can not highlight the quantified nature of gravity, i.e. the action of particle of Space. The number of impacts per second of particle of Space on the nuclei of atoms shall be substantial and would require a much more precise device.







Galactic and equatorial

angular moment pumping




Whatever the region of the equatorial zone of stars and galaxies that we consider the law of tangential speed of aether has a remarkable property.


In the model of whirl-well flow in perfect fluid used in fluid mechanics, the law of tangential speeds of the fluid is such that the angular speed around the centre of the well is strictly equal to the angular speed resulting from the variation of tangential speeds of the fluid particles. As a consequence, the fluid particles do not turn around themselves during their rotation in the whirl-well flow. This property is a direct consequence of the law speeds to 1/r that characterises these flows.


The situation is not the same in aether because the tangential speed of the flow is either constant or 1/Ör. Apart from the general shape of the flow that has been discussed above, it follows that any particle immersed in aether in the equatorial zone of stars and galaxies will be subject to an angular moment that will reduce or cancel the component of their own angular moment in the direction of the axis of the star or galaxy.


This is the galactic pumping within their main plane and the equatorial star pumping existing also for the Sun.


The K corona layer of the Sun is made up of electrons. The light reflected by these electrons shall be polarised in the direction of the axis of the Galaxy. This phenomenon can occur when the light reflected by the K corona layer is observed in the plane of the Galaxy. This condition is presently met around the winter and summer solstices. The phenomenon has been highlighted with an instrumented diaphragm tube.


It should be noticed that the magnitude of the Sun K layer angular moment pumping is in the same order of magnitude for the whirl of the Sun as that of the Galaxy. Thus the polarisation of the K layer due to the Sun, observable all along the year, is not the result of the magnetic field of the Sun. It results in fact from the pumping of the angular moment in the Sun whirl. A magnetic field has absolutely no direct action on light. Polarisation is always the result of the action of a field on a media, which in turn changes the behaviour of light.


Finally, stars observed in the equatorial plane of the Galaxy emit a polarised light. This could be an indirect consequence of galactic pumping. The angular momentum of particles that are found in the Galaxy plane is cancelled or at least reduced. The aether waves that pass inevitably in the middle of these particles have themselves an angular momentum transmitted by particle of Space. In turn, this moment is pumped by particles of space. This is a progressive phenomenon as it has been observed.



















The waves of aether





This new aether is a full break with the Lorentz’ aether, an elastic solid postulated at the end of the nineteenth century. Rather it is a fluid. But this fluid is characterised by a transversal the angular momentum of the corpuscles this fluid is made of.


A door opens on the interactions of this aether and matter in motion. This is a way to come back to Descartes. The World theory of Descartes is the only one to associate the light and gravity in a unique medium. Gravity is a kind of wind and light just as waves within this medium.


As a consequence, polarisation of light is something very different from what we thought. The polarisation of light is a phenomenon linked to the angular moment of the corpuscles of the aether, the particle of Space. The transverse angular moment of particle of Space can be transmitted during collisions. It is a fairly new vision of the nature of light, as a longitudinal vibration transmits a transverse property: the angular moment.


The aether waves have all the properties of light and of the so call "electromagnetic waves".


Let us imagine a train of waves emitted by the jump of an electron ejected from the nucleus of an atom.


This train of waves propagates through the quiet aether according to the Fermat's principle. If any motion does not animate aether, there is no reason why the train of waves would not propagate in a straight line. Its propagation speed is the mean square speed of particle of Space of the aether. When that wave train enters now in a transparent medium, it will propagate further, but at a different speed. The presence of nuclei of atoms increases the apparent density of aether and amends accordingly the mean square speed of particle of Space agitation. The deviation of the wave train is therefore in accordance with the laws of Descartes. Then comes a mirror. The wave train reflects exactly as light, since it is in the case of aether that these phenomena were first explained. Our aether wave train is now dispersed by hole. It is split up just like sea waves in the mouth of the bay.


Let us remove the hole and put on his way a motionless spectrometer in calm aether. Let us carefully locate the position of the spectrum-line of the wave train. Now move the device towards the transmitter atom at a constant speed. Our spectrometer meets waves of the train in the same order of course, but at shorter time intervals since moving towards the waves. The line will move accordingly. The displacement of the line takes place in the other direction if the spectrometer moves away from the transmitter atom. This is the Doppler-Fizeau effect.


If the nucleus of the atom is moving at a speed not negligible compared to the speed of the waves, there is an additional displacement of the spectrum-line. This is the Ives and Stilwell effect. This is result of the deformation of the nucleus moving in the aether. There is also a displacement of the rays emitted transversely to the direction of movement of atoms. This effect results from the transverse deformation of nuclei of atoms moving in the aether.


Let us now withdraw our beautiful device and place there instead a slot followed by two narrow slots, parallel to the first, in the path of the waves emitted by the atoms of a body. With a few precautions described in all books, interferences are produced on a screen placed downwards.


But now let us limit the number of trains of waves emitted by our bodies so that they reach the first slot one after the other. The first slot is splitting each incoming wave train. Then each train is split up again by the two other slots. There are now two trains of waves, one for each secondary slot. These two trains will interfere. After a few short moments, a CCD device will make the lines clearly visible. It is obviously what we can see with light.


Let us remove these gadgets and put there now a photoelectric cell on the way of our trains of waves. Their wavelength is determined by the parameters of emitter electron jumps. The cross section of the train is that of electrons and remains virtually unchanged in their journey. Their energy is inversely proportional to their wavelength. Thus each wave train can only eject one electron and the ejection velocity depends only on the energy of the wave train. As a consequence, the number of electrons ejected depends on the number of absorbed wave trains. The aether waves have a photoelectric effect in conformity with experiments done with light. The same goes for the Compton effect. If all the energy is not absorbed by the ejection of an electron, it remains a train of waves of lower power.


Of course, the waves of aether exert a wave pressure exactly as does the sound waves in the air and the waves of the sea.


If, at present, our train wave penetrates a transparent body, its speed is, for a very short time, higher than the speed of the waves of aether in the body. A shock wave occurs as it occurs in any fluid. This is the Cherenkov's effect.







The polarisation of light





In their Brownian agitation, particle of Space transmit simultaneously their linear moment and the transverse component of their angular moment. The linear moment and the angular moment of an electron can be transmitted to the particle of Space of aether. When moving, electrons cause trains of waves in the aether, exactly as a moving body causes waves in the air. Aether transmits a longitudinal variation of linear moment and an angular moment. That is to say that a longitudinal wave in aether has a transverse property: the angular moment. This is a key difference with the waves in the air.


Electrons have an angular moment like all the particles and the nuclei of atoms themselves. In addition, particles have a magnetic moment associated with their angular moment. Most experiments on polarisation of light result from the interactions of particle of Space of aether with the electrons and nuclei. These experiments involve modifications of the direction of the angular moment of the electrons and nuclei by mechanical, electrical or magnetic means.


For instance, an insulating liquid subjected to an electric field with metal plates immersed in the liquid becomes birefringent. The magnetic moments, and hence the angular moment of the electrons are oriented in one direction amending the conditions of wave propagation. This is the Kerr's phenomenon.


A magnetic field has a similar effect on the magnetic moments of electrons and the result on the aether waves is similar to the previous one. This is the phenomenon of Cotton and Mouton.


A pressure applied to a transparent body, alters the structure and the conditions of wave propagation of the aether. The same is true for liquid flow. They are the accidental birefringences of light.


Some transparent bodies have an electronic structure such as to allow only the particle of Space whose angular moment has a direction defined in relation to that structure. These bodies are polarising light.


It is easy to understand that the reflection of a wave train on a mirror may filter in some way the angular moments transmitted by particle of Space. This is the phenomenon of Malus.


It is also conceivable that isotropic bodies and liquid can turn the direction of the angular moment of a wave train passing through. This may occur when electrons have a component of their angular moment that is not at random but preferentially oriented parallel to the wave train. This is the rotary polarisation of light, which also occurs for some liquids and some transparent bodies under the action of a magnetic field.


All these similarities lead us to believe that the light rays are trains of waves of aether. These wave trains have all the wave properties of light, in addition to the corpuscular properties.


This position is confirmed by two other phenomena.


They result from the galactic pumping and of the Sun equator pumping of the angular momentum of particle of Space discussed in the previous part of this book.


However, the main plan of the Galaxy and the equatorial plane of the Sun are not parallel. It follows that we should observe a polarisation in two directions with an angle of about 70°, angle of the plane of the Galaxy and the equatorial sun.


The F component of the corona layer of the Sun is not polarised. Its spectrum is similar to that of the chromosphere. It comes from the diffusion of the light emitted by the chromosphere that is not polarised. Conversely, the K component is continuous. The electron temperature of the corona is such that the rays are spread in the spectrum and become invisible. The light is somehow re-emitted by electrons unlike the diffusion of component F.


The light emitted by the atoms of the corona is not polarised either.


The polarisation of stars in the vicinity of the galactic plane is the second confirmation of this phenomenon.






The propagation of light in space





The measures related to the light propagation are based on experimental devices easier to understand by a sketch than by explanations. Similarly, a number of calculations are needed to understand their purpose and interpret the results.


All experiments that will be discussed in this chapter are reviewed in the second chapter of the fourth part of this book, dedicated to experiments. For many of them there is a sketch.


In this part, it is intended to show that the aether made of particle of Space has exactly all the properties of light. Descartes was he right against Newton? Should we believe that light and gravity are two actions of the very same medium: the aether?


In this aether, the waves are swept away by the currents of aether exactly like a river carries waves that form on the surface when a stone is falling in. Thus, when observing the stars, their direction is slightly modified by the aether into the equatorial whirl of the Sun that causes the Earth rotation. This is the phenomenon of aberration discovered by Bradley in 1728.


But the reverse is not true. The own motion of stars does not cause any aberration. The same goes for satellites rotating around the Earth.


Aether is dragging the Earth around the Sun. It is obviously not possible to detect the motion of the Earth using measurements of wave propagation in aether. The pilot can not detect the movement of his balloon caused by the wind in seeking a difference in speed of sound in various directions: it moves with the air. This is the principle of Morley’s and Michelson's experiment. It is of course not possible to measure the speed of the Earth around the Sun using aether. The Morley’s and Michelson's interferometer allows for measuring differences in speed of propagation of waves of aether between two perpendicular directions. However, the Earth moves around the Sun at the same speed as the aether. There is no difference as well between the speed of the Sun itself and the aether galactic whirl.


But, the aether is condensing in the Sun. The Earth does not move towards the Sun because of the centrifugal acceleration. It follows that the flow speed of condensing aether is measurable. It occurs in the equatorial plane of the Sun. The maximum speed is reached at 6 hours and 18 hours in solar time when the Sun is in the plane of the interferometer and the minimum at 12 hours and 24 hours when the Sun is in a direction perpendicular to this plan.


In addition, the Earth turns around itself and its rotation speed is not the same as the aether whirl. The relative speed of the surface of the Earth against aether depends on the latitude.


Miller discovered these two streams of aether by taking systematic measures with Morley’s and Michelson's interferometer during months.


Now let us divide an aether train wave into two wave trains by a semi-reflective mirror located at the periphery of a disc. Let us place mirrors on the disk so that each ray cover the periphery of the disc in the two opposite directions and have them finally coming together on a screen after crossing again the semi-reflective mirror.


It is difficult to ensure that the optical paths are perfectly equal because we do not know a priori which is the white band in the middle. So, let us turn the disc. All the band are moving. The bands shift is exactly the very same that would occur from the optical path difference caused by the addition of the peripheral speed of the disk to the speed of light for the wave train propagating in the direction of rotation of the disc and the subtraction for the other wave train. This experiment with aether waves will result from an algebraic combination of speed of light with the speed of mirrors.


This is what should happen in aether as the mirrors attached to the disk rotate with respect to aether. That is precisely what Harress and Sagnac observed in 1912 and 1913.


Matter, and water in particular, are quite empty. They can not drag aether when moving with regard to aether. Only the reverse can happen: the dragging of the matter by the aether. However matter change the conditions of Brownian particle of Space agitation in aether so that the speed of wave propagation is changed. A transparent medium moving in aether will have an apparent density of nuclei of atoms highest in the motion direction than in the opposite direction. The speed of wave propagation will therefore not be the same in both directions. This is what Fizeau found.


But all experiments intended for measuring the speed of the Earth around the Sun by measuring the speed of the waves of aether are doomed to failure: there is no motion of the Earth in relation to the aether in its rotation around the Sun. This was shown by Hoek. He used two beams of light propagating in a tube filled in with water. The tube was motionless relative to the Earth, oriented in the direction of the speed of rotation of the Earth around the Sun.


Of course, one does observe nothing at all because the tube has no motion in relation to aether. In fact there is slight motions as shown by Miller, but the Hoek's device was not sensitive enough to measure them. Hoek does not observe any motion.


You can also fill in with water a telescope and detect the aberration of stars for aether wave. Of course you can not find any difference between this measure and the measure in the air: there is no relative motion of the telescope in aether. Boskovitch and Airy found no difference either.


There are cases where the radial speed of condensation of aether in the Sun can have a measurable effect. It shall reach 9 Km/s. Very precise optical sighting measures should allow a shift on targets. This was observed by Allais and confirmed by Esclangon.


There is also another way of highlighting the motion than interference and optical sightings. One can measure differences in wavelength of emission or absorption lines of matter.


Remote stars have emitted the light that reaches us today dozens, hundreds, thousands, millions of years before. The particles on Earth today have a condensation level very different from what it was in a so-distant past. And the most distant galaxies are the most the gap shall be important. This phenomenon was discovered by Hubble.


There are many other phenomena involving ray shifts. They are associated with travel-related sources, sensors and aether. This is the Doppler-Fizeau effect. But this effect is modified in transparent middles compared to the effect known for the sound in the air. The presence of nuclei of atoms changes the conditions of Brownian agitation of particle of Space. This phenomenon should exist for sound propagating in clouds, but the case had not been studies, probably due to lack of practical interest.








The electromagnetic effects of aether waves





Light is only the visible part of the aether waves. The eye detects only a range of wavelengths.


The aether waves can be emitted by electron jumps over the surface of the nuclei of atoms. In contrast, a wave, approaching the nucleus of atoms, can pull away an electron and thus causes a photoelectric effect. More simply aether waves can excite the electrons by increasing the amplitude of their jumps over the surface.


But the alternate motion of electrons in a conductor can also emit aether waves.


Conversely, when these waves reach the free electrons of a conductor, they can make them oscillating with their own frequency. Of course, it works only for wavelengths greater than the waves emitted during jumps over the nuclei of atoms, otherwise the waves are reflected at the surface of the conductor. If the wavelength is sufficient the waves go through the conductor. Incidentally, these waves of aether generate an alternating current by dragging the free electrons. This current then propagates into the conductor.


In addition, when the magnetic property of the emitting electrons is oriented either by magnetic field or by their motion within a conductor under voltage, and is perpendicular to the direction of oscillation, then the aether waves transmit their angular moment as in the case of polarisation. In reaching the electrons of a receiver, waves cause electrons to oscillate, but they also transmit their angular moment. The angular moments of electrons have then a common orientation. Thus the conductor will have an alternating magnetic field.


AC created by the waves of aether in a conductor itself generates an electric field which changes the structure of the conductor and hence the magnetic properties of electrons are de facto oriented in the current direction so that the conductor will have a magnetic field.


There is one fundamental difference between these two fields. The first caused by the waves of aether is perpendicular to the direction of movement of electrons and hence transverse with regard to the aether waves that cause their oscillations. The second is not caused by waves but by the electric field created by electrons in the conductor.


All these wave properties of aether quantitatively correspond to the properties of electromagnetic waves. Those waves are not at all electromagnetic by themselves.


This identity is also entirely valid for the light that corresponds to the visible part of the so-called electromagnetic waves.


The Maxwell's electromagnetic theory is completely wrong. Essentially the equation of Maxwell-Ampere is contrary to the experiments, contrary to the facts. The magnetic field of electric current is not a result of the linear motion of electrons, but only a result the orientation of their magnetic moment. Even worse, that idea of propagation of a magnetic and electric fields is a fully arbitrary idea that becomes completely unnecessary.


This idea is arbitrary because the product e0*m0 has the dimension of the inverse of the square of a speed by a pure convention, a pure postulate. If e0 can be measured accurately by several types of experiences, it is not the same for m0. Surprising as it may seem to non-specialists, the expression of the magnetic force is an assumption. Moreover, it shall be remembered that no one has ever measured the number of electrons moving in a conductor, or even obviously the speed of translation of electrons. Estimation was made assuming that all free electrons of the conductors are involved in the electrical current. The speed translation would of the order of magnitude of some cm/s.


It is on such a fragile physical basis that a system of the world as been erected. The age of the universe and its future has been inferred from that.


The most surprising aspect of this is that physicists have been gradually led to assign an angular moment to photons. All the theories of the polarisation of light have run into impossibilities. The angular moment of photons is presently considered to be transmitted to electrons within transparent media. Thus the conditions of propagation of light would be changed. This allows for explaining the change in the state of polarisation of light by transparent media.


The situation was similar in all respects for magnetism. Today, the magnetism is exclusively attributed to the electron magnetic moment thus to their angular moment. But this not applies to the magnetic fields of electric currents in conductors. It remains a final step towards only one cause of the magnetic field.


The current position is to restrict to a particular case the intervention of the angular moment of photons. Such a position is strictly untenable, unsustainable, unworkable. Physicians have set in motion a chain of gears that are inevitable, ineluctable, and unstoppable.


If photons have an angular moment, we can not do that it plays no part during the formation of waves, during propagation of waves and finally during impact on receiver. Its part can not be limited only to change transparent media. It is more especially necessary as the essential role of the angular moment of electrons is now fully recognised.


This necessity led to these two major changes in contemporary physics. It shall be recognised that the second one is very recent.


The new theory of aether exposed here is, ultimately, based upon the angular moment of electrons and upon the transfer of the particle of Space angular moment by the waves within aether. This is the opposite step of that of contemporary physics. Gradually, the physics is bound to introduce the angular moment. This theory of aether takes as its starting point the result of the surprisingly lengthy, incredibly complex, supremely bypassed official physics approach. The result will be inevitably, inexorably, ineluctably the same: the full questioning of Maxwell's arbitrary postulates.


The reason is simple and extraordinary. The angular moments are absolutely independent from reference frames as long as they are not in rotation with regard to each other. They are invariant in any and all changes of Galilean reference frame. Additionally, they are also invariant if reference frames are accelerated relative to each other, as long as, once again, there is no rotation.


The Maxwell's vectorial equations are false. Primarily is false the Maxwell-Ampere's equation. As a result, the equation of Maxwell-Hertz, already challenged by the arbitrary assumption which is in its origin, is also false, but not only by its vectorial aspect, but entirely wrong, even in its scalar form.




























1.1. Preliminary remarks


Geometric mechanics is the study of the theoretical motion of a point of mass defined by the differential analysis and geometry. This is obviously a fiction. A geometric point can not have mass. On the other hand, motion can in no way be within a body. Geometric mechanics withdraw from Nature some motions regardless of their causes or their conditions. These assumptions show the limitations of this method.


Fluid mechanics will be considered here as an extension of geometric mechanics.


The first part is devoted to basic principles of geometric mechanics.


1.2. Space and reference frames


The nature of space does not arise in fluid mechanics. The concept of space is only used, like all mathematics developments, as a tool of mind, but the tool is never to be confused with the fluid or with any kind of physical objects.


However, fluid mechanics is only searching to represent perceptible phenomena. There are no assumptions about what is not measurable. If a distance between objects or parts of the fluid is modified by a relative motion of these parts or objects, then we need a reason to the change, not a imaginary cause.


1.3.           Time


In this theory of aether, the time is not considered a physical reality. It is quite unnecessary to know the nature of time to follow the developments of fluid mechanics.


If it is determined that any phenomenon does not occur in conditions always the same, we always consider that the irregularities are due to natural causes and not to assumptions of pure imagination. For instance, oscillations of atoms are not independent from the motion of these atoms in aether. However, these oscillations are used to fix the standard of time. We do not currently have more accurate clock.


1.4.           Conservation of Mass or the Lavoisier's principle


The mass is considered that exists in things. Also it shall remain strictly globally invariant. However, the atoms have a mass defect greater they are more stable. The difference between the effective mass of atoms, measured with a spectrometer and the total mass of constituents is the mass defect.


In a fission or fusion of atoms, there is a loss of mass, or mass increase in some fusion reactions. This change in mass corresponds to a gain or loss of stability of the atoms generated by the reaction compared to the original.


In the theory of aether, the binding energy of atomic nuclei is in aether. It is the incessant impacts of particle of Space on the nucleus of atoms that ensure cohesion. Fission is linked to evaporation retardation similar to the phenomenon known for water. This retardation is a result of energy accumulation in unstable nuclei by the aether pressure drop over the millennia. Nuclear power is thus also a fossil fuel. Uranium 235 breaks down slower than the pressure of the aether decreases. This is exactly the same for the Deuterium used in thermonuclear reactions.


The mass defect, measured in nuclear reactions, comes from an entirely different phenomenon. One might consider that a part of particle of Space condenses or evaporates during these reactions, but in fact there is a much simpler explanation. We have seen that the nuclei of atoms should be considered as bubbles. The effect of the flow of aether on these nuclei is proportional to the mass because this mass is proportional to the cross section of nucleus. If the thickness of the bubble depends on the kind of nuclei, this law is no more true. Nuclei are made of a number of particles. Particles themselves are made up of particle of Space. It is assumed that the particle of Space are distributed within the wall thickness of the nuclei. This distribution can be achieved with various thickness. Mass defect of the most stable atoms can depend upon the thickness of the nucleus wall. Thicker the wall bigger the mass defect and more stable are atoms.


In fact the total mass of particle of Space that compose the core does not change. Also, is it not correct to speak of mass defect. There is in fact only a change in weight. This is more than just a nuance. The inert mass is not equal to the heavy mass. The difference is equal to the mass defect whose order of magnitude is       10-27 kg. In fact, there is also a mass defect for the elementary particles themselves since they are also bubbles with necessarily a thickness. No means of measurement can currently achieve such a small mass difference.


The balances only compare heavy masses. The only accessible quantity, moreover indirectly, is the inert mass. The inert mass of elementary particles and nuclei has been calculated by their trajectory. And it is the inert mass that appears in such calculations. All the experiments which have attempted to show the difference between the heavy mass and the inert mass come up against the order of magnitude of this difference, which is that of the mass defect. We reached at best 10-15 Kg.


As long as we did not know the cause of gravity, nothing can be learned from the phenomenon of mass defect because there is only an equation for two unknowns: mass and gravity.


1.5. Energy Conservation


In the theory of aether, the principle of conservation of energy is perfectly correct. The only energy that exists is that which corresponds to the motion of bodies with a mass. However, we can observe changes of energy level. Energy may be exchange between atoms and particle of Space for example.


1.6. Hamilton Principle


The action is always an extremum. It is assumed that the motions that occur are always those that lead to greater energy dissipation, provided that such dissipation is only a transition to a smaller level. Dissipation is always extreme.


This principle applies to the aether without any restrictions.




2.1. Preliminary Remark


Wave mechanics is the study of wave propagation in media. Its main purpose is to determine the speed of propagation.


2.2. The speed of light


In the aether, there is not the slightest difficulty. We can compare most of the phenomena that occur in the aether to phenomena in the atmosphere. Even more the phenomena in aether are generally much closer to fluid mechanics and to perfect gases than air and water. The celerity of light is the average squared speed of agitation particle of Space in aether.


2.3. The wave properties of electrons


We can obtain diffraction rings with an homokinetic electrons beam.


The modern scientists carefully emptied space so that nothing may impede the motion of their photons, so that everything is happening as in the calculations of their fully theoretical mechanics. But in reality, nothing is empty. The motion of aircraft is studied by theoretical mechanics, but aerodynamics is primarily an experimental science.


As soon as aether fills space again, it is no longer needed to imagine a mythological duality, but to consider all the phenomena within the analogy with the air.


As the planes in the air and boats on the water, electrons moving in the aether shall cause waves. Homokinetic electrons cause similar waves. That is what brings us closer to interference and diffraction. For the rest, our knowledge of the particle of Space is so limited that it seems difficult to say more.


It should be noted, finally, that the electronic microscope does not involve any wave nature of electrons. It is just a concentration of the flow of electrons.




3.1 The physical mechanics is the study of body motions by the principles of geometric mechanics.


The gravity is necessarily the result of a quantified process. The phenomena associated with gravity will be discussed in the next chapter.


3.2 The principle of inertia


In the absence of friction and obstacles to the motion of bodies continues without alteration of the speed. It makes no assumptions about the nature of the motion or its cause. It is the root cause of all the errors of the Aristotelian or nominalistic type: motion would be located inside bodies.


The principle of inertia is perfectly valid in aether. But it is a principle. Also it may be verified accurately only if we know all the effects of everything on moving bodies. This means that it will never be possible to demonstrate the principle of inertia. There will always be a host of actions ignored. However, We can approach the principle by neglecting the smaller actions.


The motion of a body in the aether will be affected of course by the presence of particle of Space that make up aether. There is no action at all if these particle of Space are globally moving at the same speed as the body. This is the case for planets and their satellites within the whirls of the Sun and planets.



3.3. Life of the neutron


The lifetime of neutrons in motion is longer than their life still.


These neutrons are formed and set in motion by cosmic rays during their entry into the atmosphere.


In aether, a moving body is subjected to the action of particle of Space. This action distorts the nuclei. The nuclei of atoms are subject to more intense frontal impacts of particle of Space than at rest. Also the nuclei are subject to an overpressure in their front side and by inertia on their back side. This pressure causes a retardation in the dissociation of the neutron into a proton and an electron. There is no problem, no new assumption, no paradox.



3.4. The slowing of astronomical clock in motion (experiment of Hafele and Keating).


This experiment was made in 1971. Four caesium clocks were transported by air to the east and west. The 14 clocks of USNO were used as a reference. It was found that the clocks had different paces according to their rotation and in relation to clocks on the Earth.


Caesium clocks, known as astronomical clock, use the vibrations of atoms. However, we saw that a body in motion relative to aether is subject to an overpressure due to the action of particle of Space. This overpressure shall change the vibration conditions of atoms. The aeroplane is moving with regards to the Earth. Its motion with regard to aether is the vector addition of its motion with regard to the earth and of the rotation of the Earth itself.








3.5. Cherenkov's Effect


Light entering a medium such as water at a speed exceeding the celerity of light in this medium causes a so-called Cherenkov's radiation.


In the aether of Space, it is clear that a phenomenon similar to the shock waves may occur. Aether is a compressible fluid since it carries waves. There is therefore a full analogy with air and gases.


3.6 Motion of the electron


The energy required for accelerating an electron by an electric or a magnetic field increase considerably when approaching the celerity of light.


This sharp increase of the energy needed to accelerate electrons is not unlike similar increase happening to aeroplanes before reaching the speed of sound. This effect results from the rapid increase in drag, and especially the emergence of the wave drag. The accelerated electrons moving in the aether at speeds similar to the speed of waves of aether, i.e. the celerity of light, is in a situation very similar to that of aeroplanes. Besides, relativist literature does not fail to make this comparison while denying very carefully the possibility of identity of causes.


3.7. Experiences Cavendish (1798) and Boys (1895)


In both cases, the aim is measuring the attraction due to gravity between bodies.


These experiments were repeated in 1927 and 1930 by Heyl.


Two masses are attached to the ends of a torsion pendulum carefully isolated from temperature changes and even from the lowest draughts. Two largest masses are placed near the end of the pendulum. One measures the angle of rotation of the pendulum according to the distance between the latter masses and those fixed to the pendulum. A more accurate method is to measure the period of oscillation of the pendulum. These measures allow for calculating the gravity attraction constant, called Universal constant. It is from the knowledge of the value that is determined the mass of stars.














In aether, no motion can be initiated without action. If a body falls down on the Earth, it is needed that something pushed it down. Stones fall down, because the condensation flow of particle of Space pushes them to the ground.


We have seen that the nuclei of atoms should be treated as bubbles. Thus, the effect of a stream of particle of Space on a nucleus is proportional to the mass of the nucleus of atoms. On the other hand, in a well of condensation, the speed of particle of Space is inversely proportional to the square of the distance to the centre of the whirl, namely the centre of the stars or bodies. This is the Newton's law of gravitation. Gravity is not something absolute and universal. This is rather the action of particle of Space flow on atom nuclei where particle of Space condense. The particle of Space themselves have not between them the smallest kind of gravity, although they are matter from which all bodies are made of. They push matter in motion. The Boys' experiment is physically explained by physical actions, matter of particle of Space acts on bodies made of matter.


3.8                                                                                                                                  Experience and Zeemann Eötvös (1890)


The Eötvös' and Zeemann's experiment also uses a torsion pendulum bearing identical masses to its end, but one measures the action of the Earth's gravity and the centrifugal acceleration due to the rotation of the Earth. This experience shows that we can not distinguish the gravity from the acceleration. Relativists forget to state the main problem of this experiment. This distinction is not possible with the precision of the device used for this experiment.













In the aether, the principle of Equivalence, postulated by the Theory of Relativity, is completely false. Gravity causes by particle of Space is a quantified phenomenon, while the acceleration is essentially a continuous mathematical concept. Speed is also essentially a continuous concept. If it were not so, he should admit that we could move from one speed to another by jumps. It would then give up any differential analysis that actually requires continuity in its very foundations. Without continuity no differential calculation is possible. Please refer to Galileo's dialogues to see that this perfectly absurd equivalence postulate had already been invented by the medieval scholastics to save the theory of Impetus from a chasm just as deep as that in which relativists rushed.


Eötvös's experiment shows simply that particle of Space are so small that it is impossible to highlight their individual action with such a device. The equality of the gravity mass and inert mass is only an approximation.











4.1. Cosmic mechanics is the study of the motion of stars and satellites in space.


4.2.  Foucault's Pendulum (1878)


The Foucault pendulum is a piece of iron suspended by a steel wire. It swings, but it also rotates. The Foucault pendulum highlights the Earth's rotation. Relative to what? That is the question.


In aether theory, motion is related to everything that is in contact with the body in motion. The motion of a ship is first relative to water. The movement of aeroplane is first relative to the air. The motion of the Earth is first be relative to aether. The Earth rotates on itself in the aether. However, the rotating Earth does not drag the Foucault's pendulum in rotation. The Foucault pendulum has no reason to turn within aether. In a way the Earth rotates with regard to Foucault pendulum.





















4.3. Mercury perihelion advance 


The long axis of the ellipse described by Mercury orbits the Sun.


In aether theory, the phenomena can not be justified by a simple formula. It is a physical action. Before making calculations, you must know what you want to calculate. He never occurs in hydraulics that we know the result of an action by calculation until it has been measured and predominant factors have been found.


The most likely cause of the advance of the perihelion of Mercury, under the theory of aether, must be the eccentricity of its orbit. The movement of Mercury can not be perfectly keplerian since Mercury has not always the same speed as the aether because of this eccentricity. It is successively pushed and dragged within the Sun whirl in proportion to the speed differences between the Mercury and aether.


However, we can also think that Mercury is in a zone where the pumping of the angular moment of the rotation of the aether has already exhausted the angular moment of particle of Space of the aether so that the tangential speed of the aether is constant. There is thus an aether drag as in the first hypothesis.


4.4.     Acceleration of Phobos


Phobos is gradually accelerated in its rotation around Mars.


The acceleration of Phobos is probably a result of the change in the law of tangential speeds in the equatorial whirl of March as for the Sun. It should be noted, in fact, that even in proportion to the masses, Phobos is much closer to Mars than Mercury to the Sun. In addition, its path is almost circular, which excludes the hypothesis of a difference in speed with aether.








4.5 Movement of artificial satellites


Artificial satellites have irregular movements.


With the exception of geostationary satellites, artificial satellites do not remain in the equatorial whirl of the Earth. They are subject to disruption through when crossing the whirls of the Earth. The detailed study of their motion should help define the limits of the vortices.


4.6 Ecliptic


All the planets are in the vicinity of the equatorial plane of the Sun. This is the case of the Earth. The plane of the trajectory of the Earth is called the Ecliptic. This plane has no specific role. It is a form of anthropomorphism that astronomic tables refer the trajectory planes of other planets to the ecliptic plane. The ecliptic plane is close to the equatorial plane of the Sun. The first thing to do is referring the orbits of the solar system to the equatorial plane of the Sun.


This phenomenon is explained by the fact that planets' rotation can only occur under the Kepler's laws when they remain inside the equatorial whirl of Sun. And yet it is true only for planets sufficiently distant from the Sun. All other trajectories are unstable. Either the body that are not in these conditions end up back on the Sun, or the Poincare's effect pushed them progressively in the equatorial whirl of the Sun.


There is a gap in the distribution of bodies in the solar system near the equatorial plane of the Sun. I have no explanation for this phenomenon.


4.7. Natural satellites


Most satellites trajectories are with regard to their planet in the position of the planets with regard to the Sun.


The explanation for this phenomenon in aether is similar to the planets. Satellites that are not in these circumstances are the exception: four small satellites of Jupiter much more remote than others, Phoebe of Saturn and Triton of Neptune, over thirty-two natural satellites of planets. It should be thought that these satellites are much more recent than the others; the Poincare's effect had not had time to have them placed in stable rotation conditions.


4.8. Galaxies


All the stars are in the vicinity of the equatorial plane of galaxies.


Poincare's effect allows accounting for this phenomenon without any difficulty.


Galaxies are huge whirls of aether. These whirls drag in rotation all the stars that are thus under the conditions of application of the Poincare's theorem. A privileged equatorial plane can only exist when there are both a condensation and a rotation of the medium, aether.


4.9 Quasars


There are bodies ejected by quasars, it seems that the ejection speeds are five to ten times the speed of light. (among others: Another source exceeding the speed limit; Mon.Not.R.Astr. Soc. 1976-177)


Quasars could be much further than indicated by calculations. The pressure of aether in the regions of space where they are located could be much lower than where we are, and aether could be in evaporation rather than condensation. If the existence of speeds in excess of the celerity of light is not inconsistent with the theory of aether, it should be noticed that that celerity has no reason to be everywhere the same and could be much higher around quasars than where we are. This is also the case in the atmosphere. The speed of sound in air is not the same everywhere.


4.10 The rings of Saturn


If the point of view of aether theory probably does not explain splitting in separate rings, the fact that these rings are in the equatorial plane of Saturn (and of other planets owing such rings) is entirely consistent with the assumptions of this theory.




4.11 The Oceans are animated by an equatorial counter-current and two tropical currents. counter-current There are also counter-currents in the temperate latitude and polar currents.


In the theory of Aether, the whirl of the Earth causes the equatorial counter-current. Tropical currents and other current and counter-currents are caused by the series of whirls located symmetrically on both sides of the equatorial whirl of the Earth. These whirls result from the Hamilton principle.


4.12 The Sun and the gaseous planets revolve about themselves. The rotation speed of the visible surface of these bodies decreases with latitude.


The same reasons as paragraph 4.11. applies. It should be noticed that one does not see solid continents on the Sun or gaseous planets so that the speed of these stars remains unknown. One can not observe the counter-currents because all of the stars turn and speeds of the currents and counters-currents should add or subtract to the overall speed. It can thus be no negative speed. This is the case of ocean currents on the Earth.


4.13 Rotation of galaxies


The tangential speed of stars in galaxies is not compatible with the mass of visible bodies within galaxies. We measure the speed of ionised gas in galaxies. The speed of rotation, from 200 to 400 km/s according to the galaxy is independent of distance. In order that this speed remains consistent with the Kepler's and Newton's law it shall be assumed that a mass of matter representing nine times the mass presently found, is present within galaxies, as a halo of invisible matter, black, but perfectly transparent. One says that it lacks 90% of the mass of galaxies. The worst is that this missing mass should be in proportion to the observable mass and localized in the same way. Such a distribution does not allow to find the laws of Kepler.


In fact, this missing mass is in the centre of galaxies. As soon as we departed from the core of galaxies, we find that the tangential speed is constant. This phenomenon results from the pumping of the angular moment of particle of Space of aether by the galaxy whirl. It results from the angular moment theorem and from energy conservation principle. This phenomenon extends beyond the remotest visible stars of galaxies because the rotation of galaxies around each other is not in conformity with the Kepler's laws.



4.14 Reference frames dragging by the rotation of the Earth


The orbits of satellites Lageos I and II were displaced 2 m per year in the direction of the rotation of the Earth. The orbits of these satellites are affected by circumpolar whirls of the Earth. Satellites can not have keplerian trajectories because of the aether drag. They are not in the equatorial whirl of the Earth. At no time, they have the same speed as aether. In addition, they pass through all the whirl of the Earth. They must describe a kind of sinusoid around the keplerian theoretical trajectory plane. This curve should be shifted. The action of the aether is immediate upon entry of the satellite in a whirl. But the deviation from the trajectory can be seen only after some time because of the inertia of the satellite. The average speed of whirls is not zero so that the average plane of their trajectory should slowly turn around the Earth. Only the latter phenomenon has been demonstrated for satellites Lageos I and II, as it is a cumulative effect over several years.


The Gravity Probe B experiment was intended to measure this referential frame dragging. Its fails. Some years of data manipulation allows only for showing the effects of the Sun and the Moon. The problem is that the frequency discovered are the double of the sea high tides frequency, which occur generally twice a month.


I have no explanation of such a frequency.












1.1. Preliminary remarks

The geometrical optics is based upon the fundamental concept of light beam and on the Fermat's principle. Its aim is to use the results of geometry and trigonometry to study some of the properties of waves propagating in a medium. There is a geometric acoustic like a geometrical optics.


It would be more than enough to verify afterwards that experiments confirm the results of this theoretical point of view, but we already know that the optical geometry gives excellent results against the accuracy of our measurements. We will instead look for the reasons for this match.


1.2. Rectilinear propagation


In aether, the problem has been addressed by Huygens, and then by Fermat. It does not require any assumption that the existence, in these elastic fluid, of particles without interactions to ensure a match limited to the size of corpuscles. It is this assumption that is the basis of the theory of aether.


The image of the light ray is given by the short beam caused in aether by the movement of a particle. This beam is the trace of the wave train issued.


1.3. The Fermat's principle


Fermat proposed his principle under the assumption of the existence of aether that. As part of the theory of fluid mechanics, the theory of aether meets all the principles set forth in this part of the Science and in particular the principle of Hamilton. There is no restriction.


1.4. Velocity of light


We can not totally separate the geometrical optics of the optical physics. Although this problem is discussed in the next section, it is necessary to mention it here, because the Fermat's principle assumes the celerity of light in the media is known.


In aether, the speed of waves is determined strictly by the laws of statistics. The speed of waves of aether is the mean square speed of agitation of particle of Space in aether. Quantum aspects and aether wave propagation as well may be studied by statistics, but it is not assumed that these phenomena are probabilistic in themselves. Only when phenomena involving a large number of impacts or of elementary waves, it is necessary to use statistics. No assumption about the nature of particle of Space is made here, outside the conventional assumptions of fluid mechanics and the existence of an angular moment of particle of Space. For example, it is now certain that atoms exist. It is therefore not needed to assume they have in the air for instance a certain probability of presence. Atoms are where they are. We can see them on photograph. The particle of Space are not visible. But there is no such assumptions that they will never be bring to our perceptions. The particle of Space are where they are and don't have any probability of presence in this theory of aether. Nevertheless they can be applied statistics as is done for fluids such as water or air. Indeed, we see that the aether waves should be fully identified to go through the slits of the interferometer and provide interference.


1.5 Fixed stars aberration


The telescopes highlight apparent motion of the so call fixed stars. These stars can be regarded as fixed because of the very short duration of our measures and their distance to Earth. They seem to describe a circle over the year.


This motion is due to the apparent movement of the Earth. This phenomenon was discovered in 1728 by Bradley. The similar experience of Boscovitch and Airy will be discussed with Fizeau's experience to the next section. This is independent of the distance from the star observed. It has no relation with the fact that the received light in the telescope was emitted long before by the atoms of the star and that the Earth is not at all in the position where it was then.










In the aether, waves move against the aether. Motions or currents of aether change the direction of observation, like a stream of water alters the propagation of waves that can be seen on the surface and as the wind changes the propagation of sound. The whirl of the Sun causes the light drag as it causes the Earth drag.


Conversely, there is no additional aberration if the star moves in relation to other stars. The double stars, rotating around one another, are not shifted according to the direction of instantaneous speed relative to the Earth. Their speed is high enough that we can ignore the motion of the Earth on its orbit during the observation duration. Each of the double stars is observed without aberration. Once emitted, the light propagates through aether without any link with the transmitting atoms. It is the difference with the ballistic theory of light as Newton's theory and with the theory of photon. However, the double stars have the same annual aberration as other stars. The phenomenon of aberration is not existing in any way for satellites of the Earth as observed by Shtyrkov. They move with the Earth around the Sun, they do not, therefore, have any aberration as fixed stars. They have, as well, no aberration that might result from their speed relative to the Earth. The reason is the same as for the double stars.



1.6 The parallax of fixed stars.













Bessel discovers in 1840, the parallax of fixed stars. It results from the change in direction of a star when the observer moves from a point in space to another. It's simple geometry


1.7 The dispersion of light


This phenomenon, known since immemorial time by rainbows, was explained by Descartes as a consequence of the laws of refraction, but Newton was the first to attribute the phenomenon to the speed of light in the refracting media showing that it depends on the colour and therefore on the wavelength.








The propagation of a wave train in aether is changed by the presence of atoms, as the presence of bodies is changing the wave propagation in air and water. The speed of propagation depends upon the density of atoms. This density can be effective in the case of statistically motionless atoms with regard to aether or apparent if all the atoms move. The speed of waves in the aether is determined by the particle of Space speed of agitation. The speed of agitation is changed by the presence of atoms. On the other hand, the longitudinal motions of particle of Space, during the passage of a wave, are more affected the longer is the wavelength. It is extremely difficult to express mathematically these influences. The distance between atoms and the size of their nucleus shall intervene. This complexity is reflected by phenomena that remained completely unexplained so far.


1.8. Doppler-Fizeau effect


In the theory of aether, it seems obvious. The waves propagate with regard to aether. The analogy with the air is complete. We will see in § 1.9 that two additional effects are observed and can be explained very easily.

















1.9. Ives' and Stilwell's Experiment


This experiment is to compare the wavelengths of atoms moving relative to the Earth, measured in the direction of their motion and in the opposite direction. One measures a frequency difference greater than it results from by Doppler-Fizeau effect.


The atoms move through the aether. They are therefore subject to the action of the aether, i.e. compression on their front. This compression flattens the nuclei.


In addition to the shift due to Doppler-Fizeau effect, resulting from the motion of the atom relative to the observer, in a transversely immobile medium relative to the observer, we shall observe a complementary shift, which is indeed the case.


The deformation of nuclei of atoms when they move in aether, not only affects the front and rear, but also the transversal zones where the curvature is higher. Thus wave trains transmitted transversally to the motion of atoms have a different wavelength than the atom motionless in the aether.





2.1. Preliminary  remark


The wave optic gathers the wave properties of light waves and the like that propagates in aether.


2.2. The wave nature of light


This was discovered by Newton by the interference rings that bear his name. Newton attributed the phenomenon to the impact of its corpuscles of light on the surface of Newton's aether surrounding bodies. Aether would have been vibrating like water under the action of a stone. The light itself would not have been made of waves. Since then, it appeared that interference not occurs only in the vicinity of the bodies. Light itself shall be a vibration.


All fluids known are carrying waves. Aether is a fluid. The light propagates through the aether like the sound in the air.


2.3. Diffraction


The light rays undergo a phase displacement while propagating in the immediate vicinity of a screen. This results in a phenomenon of interference with the rays propagating further off.


Diffraction is an opening of the waves by obstacles, a phenomenon observed in the water and air. The analogy between media can be inferred from the similarity of properties.

2.4 Weak light interference


In 1909, Taylor succeeded to obtain perfectly normal interference using light source intensity extremely weak for a sufficient time.










Devices used for interference involve a division of the incident wave trains. But a wave of a medium can be divided into two waves with half amplitude without any paradox. In the case of Young's slots, the first source is a slot that diffracts incident train wave. However, the diffraction is not a simple deviation of incident train waves, but a kind of opening quite comparable to the effect of a lens used wisely. The initial beam made of one very single wave train becomes a cone. Both following slots are thus lightened by the  very same single wave train. A second diffraction in these slots provides the illumination of the photographic plate. This is impossible in the case of ballistic theories based on light corpuscles such as Newton's theory or the photon..


2.5. Polarisation of light


Polarisation by refraction was discovered by Huygens in 1690. The polarisation by reflection was discovered by Malus in 1810. This phenomenon manifests itself in the extinction of a light beam after passing through polarisers oriented properly in relation to another. Polarisers are birefringent bodies. In the case of polarisation by reflection extinction is achieved for the Brewsterian incidence angle.


In aether, the waves are longitudinal. The particle of Space that transmit waves of aether are both animated by an alternating translation and a rotation on themselves. A wave of aether is the transmission by impact between particle of Space of a longitudinal motion and of a transversal angular moment. However, the particles of atoms are also in rotation on themselves. They impose an anisotropy of aether in their neighbourhood. An arrangement of angular moments allows particles to account for the birefringence, as the arrangement of magnetic moments in the theory of Silberstein. The difference is in the use of a physical known phenomenon instead of electromagnetism even less known that the polarisation that pretends to explain the phenomenon.


2.6. Kerr phenomenon


Kerr discovered in 1875 that one could give birefringent properties to most liquids by placing them in an electric field. One wanted to interpret this experiment as proof of the validity of the Maxwell's postulates. It would show the electromagnetic nature of light, one of its most strange properties.


This view is fundamentally wrong. The change in the arrangement of molecules by the electric field causes the phenomenon. The liquid subjected to an electric field acquires properties ensuring birefringence, even without passage of light. There is an intermediary between the light and the electric field.


No assumption is made about the nature of electromagnetic phenomena in this study of the aether. The Kerr's phenomenon highlights the electric fields action on the electrons. No explanation for this action is necessary to understand phenomena related to light. In the same way, no explanation of gravity is needed to explain the atmospheric pressure. This experience highlights the process of action of the electric fields on the matter.


Assuming an electric field orients the magnetic moments and thus the angular moment of particles of the body subject to its action, it follows that the aether will have in this body a specific kind of symmetry. This symmetry will affect the angular moment transmitted by the particle of Space during the passage of a train of waves.


Kerr's birefringence should therefore be linked to the appearance of a magnetic field caused by the common orientation of magnetic moments of electrons.



2.7 Magnetic birefringence


This phenomenon, discovered by Cotton and Mouton, is quite comparable to the previous one. Simply replace "electric" with "magnetic"


2.8. Accidental biréfringence


Bodies subjected to compression and fluid flow have birefringent properties. These phenomena do not provide any new information regarding the polarisation.


2.9. Polarisation rotation


The polarisation rotation was discovered by Arago in 1811. The quartz, some isotropic bodies and some solutions have the property of rotating the polarisation direction of light.


A specific distribution of angular moments of particles in the related bodies produces a change of wave propagation in aether.


2.10 Magnetic Polarisation rotation


The experiment, conducted in 1846 by Faraday, shows that the magnetic fields change the arrangement of molecules in liquids such as carbon disulphide or of some transparent bodies such as flints. This change leads to polarisation rotation. There is in no case any direct action of the fields on light as has been claimed.


Thus this experiment is linked to the previous two.


2.11. Rotatory dispersion


Rotatory dispersion was discovered by Biot and Arago. The rotation of the polarisation direction in the previous experiments is depending upon the wavelength of light.


This phenomenon shows that the speed of particle of Space that is transmitted in the aether, as we have seen, is proportional to the wavelength. In addition to the longitudinal pressure waves that propagate through aether, these waves are characterised by angular moments transmission. These angular moments are caused by emitter electrons, together with the longitudinal vibration. Thus the rotation speed of emitter electrons shall be related to the wavelength.


2.12. - Zeeman's effect and Stark's effect


The phenomena of decomposition rays by the magnetic and electric fields are related to the dispersion rotation.




3.1. Preliminary remarks


The approach will be limited to optical phenomena related to the propagation. Its purpose is to apply the results of the statistical analysis and of the differential analysis to the phenomena of undulatory propagation of wave trains. There is a sound physics as well as an optical physics.


Experiment confirms this theoretical point of view. We will justify this match.


3.2. The celerity of light


In aether, the celerity of light is the average squared speed of agitation of particle of Space. This celerity depends upon the density of atoms or particles present in aether where the measure is done. These atoms or particles have an agitation speed slower than particle of Space. The celerity of light is reduced with increasing the density of atoms or particles.


3.3. The Fizeau's experiment


This experiment shows a difference of optical path between the optical path of light in a liquid flowing in the direction of the light and the same optical path in a liquid flowing in the opposite direction. Fizeau discovers a difference of optical path he attributed to a dragging coefficient of light by the media.












We noticed that the celerity of light depends upon the density of atoms in the aether. But the displacement of all these atoms causes an increase in apparent density for a light beam propagating in the direction opposite to the flow of atoms and an apparent decrease in density when the light propagates in the direction of the flow. Statistics allow for calculating the magnitude of the phenomena. I did not performed the calculations. There is an obvious result: The speed of the fluid and light are not added algebraically.


The density correction to make in flowing fluid is proportional to the square of the density factor, defined as the inverse of the index of the medium. This result is related to the expression of linear moment in fluids and is not surprising.


3.4. Boscovitch's and Airy's experiment


This is the phenomenon of aberration of fixed stars observed with a telescope filled in with water. The aim was to show the dragging of light by water, i.e. to confirm the Fizeau's experiment described above.


In the case of aether, and once more this is not the Lorentz' aether, but a fluidic aether made of particle of Space, as described here, there is no restriction on the phenomenon of the aberration of fixed stars, this second experiment receives the same explanation as Fizeau's experiment.


3.5. Michelson's and Morley's experiment (1885)


The aim of this experiment is to measure the effect of the speed of the Earth on the celerity of light. It shows that there is a residual effect at most equal to a few km/s instead of 30 km/s expected in the framework of the Lorentz' aether. The systematic nature of this residual effect and its variation during the rotation of the Earth itself and around the Sun were discovered by Miller in 1928. The results of Miller's measurements were analysed by Allais in 1998. The variation in sidereal time is scientifically established by the statistical analyses performed by Allais. The demonstration is definitively made that optical experiments can reveal the movement of the Earth around the Sun, which is in total contradiction with relativist assumptions.















This experiment gave exactly the result that would have occurred in the world of Descartes. So there is no problem in aether whirl. The Earth is turning around the Sun at the same speed as aether. The residual effect measured by Miller results from aether wind caused by condensation of particle of Space in the Sun and from the rotation of the Earth with regard to its own whirl. According to the time of measurement, the plane of the interferometer is changing from a parallel position to a perpendicular position to the direction of the Sun. Condensation aether wind in the Sun has a maximum effect in one case and no one in the other.


3.6. Hoek's experiment


The Hoek's experiment, like Fizeau's one, is aimed to compare the celerity of light between two optical paths, but one of them is covered in water, the other in the air. Obviously, there is a difference of optical path. But the objective was to measure the variation depending on whether the experiment was conducted in the direction of travel of the Earth or in the opposite direction. Hoek got no difference.











There can be no effect in the case of aether dragging the Earth since the Earth does move with regard to aether.


3.7. Sagnac's experiment


This experiment was conducted in 1913, and before by Harress in 1912, but Harress placed his device in water although Sagnac put it in the air. It was to show a composition of the celerity of light with the tangential speed of a rotating disc. A semi-reflecting mirror, placed on the rotating disc, splits into two the light beam coming from the source. Each beam is then reflected by mirrors placed at the periphery of the disc. Both beams have the same optical path, but each is going along in one rotation direction. The semi-reflecting mirror allows recomposing these beams that finally reach an interferometer. This allows for measuring the optical path difference between the two beams.














This difference is zero when the disc is stopped. But when the disc turns, the interference fringes scrolls showing a difference of optical paths. This difference is exactly the one that can be calculated by considering that the tangential speed of the disk is added to the celerity of light for one of the light beam and subtracted for the other one.


This experiment shows without any doubt that it is perfectly possible to measure speed in relation to the aether. You shall be, of course, moving in relation to it, which is not the case in the Michelson's experiment. On the contrary, in the Sagnac's experiment, the disk is moving relative to aether. The experiment is much more fundamental than that of Michelson. It is a positive experiment. This is a "crucial" experiment fully, opposite to the Special Relativity Theory (SRT) and which remains unexplained by the General Relativity Theory (GRT).


In 1924 Michelson and Gale used in Chicago a new fix interferometer. Both paths have exactly the same length. But one of E-W arm (DE in the sketch) is more than 300 meters located in the North of the other arm, which is by the way closer to the equator. The tangential speed of the Earth is not the same for both arms.

Michelson and Gale experiment


lac being the Chicago latitude, the result is a difference between the two duration of : t2 - t1 = (4 p L l sin lac)/(24 c2). Michelson and Gale measured an interference fringe displacement of 0,230 ± 0,005 fringe width (they performed 269 measurements) the theoretical displacement is 0,236. This is exactly the same experiment than Sagnac; It shows the rotation of the Earth.





4.1. Preliminary remarks


The approach combines the quantum phenomena resulting from the discontinuous nature of light.


4.2. Radiation pressure


The theory of waves in compressible media leads to a pressure effect of waves on an obstacle. The theory is verified in the water as well as in the air. This is the Bartholi's- Maxwell's pressure.


The aether waves result from the motion of things that physically exist and which have mass for they make up the particles. These are real waves in a real fluid. They shall have a radiation pressure as well. This is obviously the case.


4.3. Energy of light


Every and all waves carry energy. The waves of the sea may destroy dykes, wave in the air, break windows.


In aether, the light is made up of wave trains with a cross-section the size of the sources thus of electrons. These wave trains are transmitted by the oscillations of electrons. They will have a vibration frequency and an amplitude defined by the transmitting electron vibration. Thus, the magnitude of the lighting of a screen is not related to the amplitude of elementary waves, but only to the number of elementary wave trains. This is the way to explain the Planck's formula.


4.4. The photoelectric effect


The photoelectric effect was discovered in 1888 by Hallwachs. Light can eject electrons from some bodies. The ejection speed is independent of intensity. But the number of ejected electrons depends directly on this intensity. The speed ejection depends on the other hand, upon the wavelength of the light.


In the aether, waves have additional property with regard to the waves of water or air. The particle of Space have no interaction between them but their impacts. Wave trains propagate in the direction of emission. They have the cross-section of electrons and are looking like a bundle. These elementary wave trains are quite capable of ejecting electrons from matter by a mechanical process. The amplitude of lighting is only related to the number of trains of waves hitting the screen simultaneously. The energy of each wave train is only proportional to the frequency. This explanation is very similar to the one proposed for the photon. But nobody was able to explain how it works physically with photons. With aether waves, there is no problem because the shocks between trains of waves and electrons can be reduced to mechanical shock of bodies having a mass.



4.5. Compton's effect


The Compton effect is a kind of photoelectric effect where light is not completely absorbed. In addition to the electron emitted, there is a light wave of reduced frequency as a function of the energy required ejecting the electron.


Wave trains in aether provide an equivalent explanation. But it is an explanation, because there is no additional assumption. In aether, it is purely mechanical. The calculation done for the photon is identical, but this calculation is related to real masses, to real kinetic energy and real momentum.


4.6 Aspect's experiment (1981)


Pairs of trains of waves are produced by a source consisting of calcium atoms. The wave trains are counted and their direction of polarisation is registered in two directions on one side of the source and also in two directions on the opposite side.


Correlation of the directions of polarisation is disclosed by these counts. Other experiments of this kind have subsequently confirmed this result.


The pairs of wave trains are actually the very same train of waves in aether divided by the experimental device and therefore they have strictly the same characteristics of polarisation. The polarisation correlation observed results from a correlation imposed at the start of the division of wave trains. In aether there is not the shadow of any paradox. There is not the shadow of any difficulty. There is no need for the shadow of any additional assumption.




5.1. General


The cosmic optical is the study of phenomena related to the propagation of light waves and the like into the aether. It should be noticed that the aberration of fixed stars was studied in the geometrical optics because it involves the motion of the Earth, as a first approximation. In fact, the reciprocal effect of the movement of stars should be also reviewed. The results and explanations are the same. The cosmic optical is limited to the changes that may affect the light propagation in the aether, especially near the stars.




5.2. The deflection of light by the Sun


In aether, the deviation is split into two equal parts. The first results from the axial component of the movement of particle of Space, the second of the tangential component. The first half can be identified to Newton's effect, the second to Descartes' effect. Note that this deviation has this value in the equatorial whirl of the Sun in which the Earth is plunged. All the measures have been done in this whirl.








5.3. The redshift


There are many experiences on this type of phenomenon. The one in question here is the redshift of spectral lines of atoms at the surface of the Sun in relation to spectral lines of identical atoms located on the surface of the Earth.


The aether waves emitted at the surface of the Sun have the local wave speed. But away from the Sun's surface, they are in an aether progressively slowing down compared to the Sun. It follows from this reduction of speed, an increase of static pressure, as shown by the principle of conservation of energy. The speed of the waves is thus increased. However, in a divergent flow, the wavelength varies as the speed. It is also the case in water flows. The wavelength, the only data available to the measure, is thus increased. The Doppler-Fizeau's effect acts in the opposite direction. These two phenomena are however negligible for the Earth. The observed effect for the Sun results therefore from a difference between the effects of both phenomena. The measurements suggest that the first phenomenon prevails slightly on the Doppler-Fizeau's effect.


5.4. Redshift when additional star passes behind the sun


One measured a drop in frequency when Taurus A pass behind the Sun, in addition to the deviation.


The earth is much closer to the Sun than Taurus A. There is therefore a dissymmetry between the effect of the flow of condensation on the side of the Sun of Taurus A and the same effect on the side of the Earth. The asymmetry is in the same direction as in the phenomenon of the preceding paragraph. It should be noted that the shift due to Taurus A is taken into account before and during his path behind the sun and therefore does not play any part.


5.5. Wavelength shift due to the gravity field of the Earth


There is a shift between the wavelengths of two atoms located at different altitudes on a vertical. This experiment was conducted with masers.


This phenomenon results in aether of a difference of the radial velocity of the aether flow between the two points. With regard to light, a point at ground level appears to be moving off from a point at a higher altitude. The shift results from the Doppler's effect.


5.6. Measure of the optical path Venus-Earth


Recent experiments have shown that there is a strong probability that the speed of light in the aether is not independent of movements in the Earth and Venus, used as a radar reflector. This is only a probability because the shift is small and the measure has been taken up many times.


In the aether of course the result is expected. The phenomena are somewhat intricate by the presence of the motions of aether to be taken into account.


5.7. Hubble's effect


There is a very important redshift of the absorption lines of atoms in galaxies and quasars.


In the aether, matter is condensing. The size of atoms is changing with the condensation rate. The frequency of waves emitted depends on the size of atoms. There is thus no reason for the waves we receive millions of years after they were emitted, show matter strictly in the state where it is now on the Earth. This redshift is thus fully in agreement with the condensation of aether.


A slight asymmetry in the Hubble's effect was found. This asymmetry remained completely unexplained up to now. The cosmological models shall rely for some authors on the new concept of ageing of light, while others it shall assume the existence of a new particle that has not yet been identified on Earth.


This asymmetry, or RTS effect, receives in the theory of aether an obvious explanation. The Earth is not at the centre of the cluster of galaxies, known as LSG, which we belong to. This is something very similar to what was stated in paragraph 5.4. Just replace the LSG cluster in place of the Sun.


More recently, an additional shift was found for those stars behind large clusters. We may take the reasoning used for Taurus A.


A star hiding another one has been also discovered. Its shift should be less important than that of the star behind. But this is the opposite. This result is in complete contradiction with the current theories. In aether, the explanation is very simple. The pressure of the aether is not the same everywhere. The nearest star is in a region where the pressure is lower than where the farthest star is. It should be noted that this case could be much general than one is willing to believe today, the distance of celestial being guessed rather than calculated.


















1. A extensive number of experiments prove the theory of Relativity. All scientists believe that Einstein's theory is true. Einstein himself said: "I believe my theory of relativity to be true. But it will only be proved for certain in 1981, when I am dead. "


Answer: conformity of experiment to the experiments is a necessary condition, but will never be a sufficient condition. It is necessary to demonstrate the uniqueness of the solution. Whatever the number of experimental confirmations, and even though all are bright, they can not in any way prove a theory. One may, for some time, pretend to ignore some problems, accept an inconsistency, turn away from powerless dissidents. But one can do nothing against an accumulation of problems, against a piling up of paradoxes, against a crowd of dissidents. This is the very definition of crisis. The Pure Science is not only in crisis, it is in distress. Each new discovery of physics, far from reinforcing the paradigm needs its share of complementary assumptions, like so many monstrous prostheses.


2. It annually publishes dozens of books, hundreds of papers on relativity. There are annual conferences, where the best scientists are applauded for their contribution to the consolidation of the relativistic and quantum paradigm. I should also mention the countless books, magazines and newspaper articles where authors and journalists, yet far from having the intellectual capacity to understand the enormous developments that support the mathematical physics, just to show their admiration for a description as elegant, as perfect and as total of the universe.


Answer: Erasmus wrote: "Men have their supreme pleasure in what is supremely strange. Their vanity is concerned, they applauded to show that they have seized. The fact is most unlikely, the more they are quick to believe and to tickle the ear. " And Einstein himself confirms: "Why is it that nobody understands me and everybody likes me" (March, 12 1944).





3. Philosophers themselves have finally agreed with the theory of Einstein.


Answer: Alain repeated until his death: "we will find neither a prime number between 13 and 17, nor a limited space, nor two simultaneous moments, nor a time slower than another."


4. Alain was a philosopher of the older generation.


Answer: Alain was born in 1868, Einstein in 1879. Einstein was the same generation.


5. The theory of Aether is a new attempt, as desperate as the previous ones, to restore mythological aether. Under the guise of minor changes, it revives outdated principles.


Answer: On the one hand, taking into account the angular moments is not a minor change Angular moments were superbly ignored by relativists, as well as by the Newton's gravitation theory. On the other hand, knowledge of matter has been radically changed for a century. In particular, we now know that matter is practically empty. This discovery, literally essential, arose much later than the development of theories of Lorenz Aether and Relativity. It can not be ignored. However, those theories take no account of that unimaginable discovery. They could not because this discovery comes later on. This is fully unacceptable now.


6. This is not the first time that one try to explain gravity with corpuscles. The particle of Space of this alleged new aether are the same as the corpuscles of LeSage.


Answer: LeSage could not believe that the matter is so empty. Furthermore, his corpuscles have not angular moment. Finally, LeSage did not assign the gravity to the motions of aether, but to the pressure that these corpuscles exercise on the body. He considered a kind of mask effect between bodies. He thought that his corpuscles never fill in the space between bodies.






7. The condensation of particle of Space in particules, which is assumed in the theory of space, shall lead to an increase in the size of the body. What has never been observed.


Answer: If the size of all bodies increases at the same time, how can we see them growing? You can find similar examples. It is impossible to measure the elongation of a steel bar with regard to temperature with a standard made of steel that would be at the same temperature. You shall use the rule to the standard reference temperature. The problem is that we have no reference outside of particle of Space themselves, but we are still far from being able to bring to our perception.


8. In the theory of Aether, the inert mass and gravity mass are not equivalent as clearly demonstrated by the experiment.


Answer: experiment shows that the means of measurement we currently use do not allow us for distinguishing the gravity mass from the inert mass. The equivalence of gravity to acceleration is a mere hypothesis. It is even a double assumption, since it implies that gravity is a continuous phenomenon, when the acceleration is continuous by definition.


9. The comparison with the steam is not valid because it shall provide energy to vaporise. It is the reverse in the nuclear reactions in which the energy is released.


Answer: I made it clear that water vapour should be considered in a state of retarded vaporisation. It had been obviously necessary to provide energy for water to be put in this state, but when it is, it needs nothing to return. We observe only this refund during nuclear reactions.


10. But it shall be assumed that the atoms were subjected in the past to energies corresponding to those recovered.


Answer: This is not a hypothesis but a result. We shall be precise. Energy is everything if you do not specify the body to which it relates, or the motions involved. Energy, as motion, can not exist by itself without moving bodies. Atoms were subjected to pressure from aether more important than that particle of Space exert today on their nucleus. The decrease in the pressure of the aether has left some bodies in a disintegration retardation status.


11. It is experimentally proved that the gravitational attraction of stars has a perfect symmetry of revolution. Whirls in aether are in complete contradiction with this.


Answer: Nothing is perfect. Evidence of symmetry, made by the relativists, absolutely necessary for their theory, is based upon exceptions. There are altogether six satellites of planets outside the vicinity of the equatorial plane of their planet among more than thirty-two, not counting the rings of Saturn and other planets. The motion of these satellites is not fully known. Their mass has not yet been determined. These satellites do not follow the Kepler's laws. They are actually outside the equatorial whirl of their planet. Their speed shall therefore combines with the speed of condensation of particle of Space, according to laws similar to those used in aerodynamics.


12. It is true that all that all planets and asteroids, with the exception of Hidalgo, are located in the vicinity of the equatorial plane of the Sun. But it is absolutely untrue for comets. Hidalgo is also seen as a comet by many astronomers.


Answer: It is wrong for a few comets. Of the 56 who were seen at least twice, only Temple-Tuttle, Pons-Brooks and Halley are retrograde and therefore frankly outside the whirl of the equatorial sun. Their trajectory should be disturbed as a result. Among the comets that have appeared only once and whose period is less than 200 years, only Gambart-Pons, Ross and Swift-Tuttle are retrograde. The motion of these comets should not be exactly keplerian. There are also some comets whose the orbital plane is quite inclined to the equatorial plane of the Sun. These comets have also a disturbed motion, but much less than the previous ones. They actually spend part of their path into the whirl of the Sun. Their orbit should certainly not be strictly plane.





13. The theorem Poincaré was issued to explain precisely the form of galaxies and the rings of Saturn, one does not see what this theory of aether brings more.


Answer: Poincare established his theorem to explain the formation of stars by tearing matter. Poincare theorem implies that there is condensation and rotation in a fluid. Without aether, or fluid that fill space, the theorem can not be applied. The stars that compose the galaxies are in rotation, but nothing connects them, except their gravitational attraction. It is possible that we can demonstrate that bodies attracting each other and assumed to be rotating around an axis, present figures comparable to those obtained Poincare, but the demonstration in question uses a fluid and fluid equations, so that it can not be applied to the case of stars. Aether is a condensing and rotating fluid. The theorem is without ambiguity. The conditions for its establishment are fully complied with by aether whirls.


14. Sagnac's experiment does not show a motion of the rotating disc in relation to the aether, but a movement against the absolute space as an empty form. The Sagnac’s experiment is performed within the inertial reference frame of the Earth. This is why it is possible du change from the reference frame of the disc to the Euclidian tangent reference frame and thus to justify the result obtain by Sagnac.


Answer: absolute has no place in science. I am well aware that the Lorentz' solid aether was not realistic, but was it worth to denounce such a mistake and use afterwards similar concepts? What is the absolute? What is an empty form? Words, only words. It is choosing the path of medieval nominalism. It was also the system of Aristotle. Is it worth so much to boast of progress, and then to fall into the oldest mistakes? We shall add here that relativists speak of internal experiment. What is an internal experiment? This is where the nominalistic chasm appears with the more brightness.


You add a second justification. We do not see very well the relation with the first. The problem is that with this additional assumption of inertial reference frame, each physicist obtains the right result by different and irreconcilable calculations. No explanation is annoying. Too much explanation is lethal. A high level relativist has even shown that the discrepancy can not be justified with the relativistic postulates. The trick is that this experience is relevant of the general relativity theory since there is rotation. And so, since we can not find the result by special relativity, there is an unmistakable evidence of the validity of general relativity, which, tragically, has not yet allowed to find the desired result. Are there enough twisted minds to doubt the validity of this masterful way of cause and effect.


Sagnac's experiment shows motions relative to the aether when you move relative to aether. Michelson’s and Morley's experiment shows that there is no motion relative to aether when you are moving with aether.


15. Experiments show that electromagnetic fields have direct effects on light, providing evidence of the electromagnetic nature of light.


Answer: It is perfectly false. The related experiments show the rotation of the polarisation direction under the action of electromagnetic fields. But it should be remembered that the fields are not directly acting on light but on bodies or liquids. Electromagnetic fields alter the structure of bodies or liquids. This causes in turn a rotation of the plane of polarisation. Electromagnetic fields have absolutely no known direct action on light or electromagnetic waves. It can not be excluded that the electromagnetic fields could have an effect on light. Such an action would not allow for considering these waves as electromagnetic by themselves. Gravity has an effect on light. It does not mean that light is gravitational. This sentence has even no meaning.


16. It is not only involving the rotation of the polarisation plane, but also optical phenomena linked to paramagnetism of atoms and the corresponding resonance.


Answer: In this case also the electromagnetic fields do not act directly on the light. This is the modification of atoms or of their arrangement that causes a change in the behaviour of light.






17. The transmission of angular moment during impact between particle of Space is only a hypothesis.


Answer: In the impact of two wooden balls mounted on bearings, one observes a partial transfer of angular moment. In fact, it is likely that the transfer is caused by the impact of atoms of each ball, which are overlapping. This transfer would result from longitudinal shocks between atoms. Thus it is a tangential impact on the scale of the balls. If the impact at the level of atoms were elastic, the angular moment of balls would pass along according to the same laws as the longitudinal impact. The particle of Space are probably made of elements that enable the transfer of angular moment by skew deformations.


18. The polarisation is not the only manifestation of the nature of light. Electromagnetic waves have a transversal nature as is proved by experiment.


Answer: The experiments only show that the electromagnetic waves have transverse effects, but there is no evidence that these waves are transversal by themselves. Longitudinal waves such as those that propagates in water, air and in all media may well have transversal effect. Watch only a cork on the waves. This is a phenomenon transverse to the propagation of waves.


19. It is quite absurd to suggest that the magnetic field of conductors can result from anything else than electrical currents. This is the principle of operation of electric motors. This theory of aether questioned a fact clearly established for two centuries. This is an example of the absurdity where inevitably leads any criticism of contemporary physics.


Answer: nothing is definitively proven. For two centuries, a considerable number of developments have been discovered. In particular, the magnetic field of the magnet is now assigned exclusively to the magnetic moment of electrons. Some authors have imagined that the magnetic moment of the electrons would be the manifestation of the rotation of the charge of the electron inside the electron itself. Thus there would be only one kind of magnetism: that arising from charge translation. This would be also the cause of the spin. I do not wish to further examine the issue of the logical induction from the translation of an electric charge in conductors to its motion in a closed circuit, then to the rotation outside any conductor, finally to the rotation of the charge in electron itself. This is a surprising sequence. It should be noted that one would be, in those circumstances, obliged to accept that there are, within conductors, two magnetism potential root causes, the result of angular moments of electrons, which is added to the magnetism resulting from the translation of electrons.


How, simply because of translations, electrons might have a magnetic field? In the aether of Lorentz, one could think that the moving electrons change aether, but relativists empty space into a geometric empty universe. If all bodies had a magnetic field while moving, one could imagine that all bodies are changing the space metric, as does the mass to generate gravity in the unlimited imagination of relativists. But only the moving electrons have this remarkable property to generate a magnetic field. The question, however, was more limited. And the answer is simple: how the theory of electric motors is it changed by replacing the cause of magnetism by another? The key is that the field is proportional to the electric current in accordance with the Biot-Savart's law.


20. Renouncing the orbital electron is abandoning the atomic theory whose value has been established for seventy years.


Answer: It should be recalled that a lot of assumptions, postulates and so-called principles have been grafted on the Bohr's theory to reflect the paradoxes resulting from this global vision of atom. First, we had to make a distinction, in layers or levels, between the circular paths and elliptical trajectories. One wonders why some paths shall be circular, other elliptical? It is tempting to believe that the division between these trajectories is at random. It is not. They are fully determined. In addition, the atoms have no magnetic effect by themselves. One invented the probability of presence and stationary paths to reflect this fact contradicting the Bohr's model. These are the secondary quantum number and the magnetic quantum number. One shall add other niceties: the spin and the magnetic spin. To make things worse, such an unlimited imagination remains insufficient. Additional postulates are necessary. Two electrons can not have the same numbers. It is the exclusion principle of Pauli. The trajectories are very large relative to the size of electrons, and it is not understandable why two electrons can not share them.


21. By removing the planetary electrons, it becomes impossible to explain the spectra of emission and absorption.


Answer: From a strictly rational standpoint, nothing could ban to include all categories of Sommerfeld in the nucleus. The size of the nuclei of atoms depends on the number of particles within them. This produces the first and second quantum number. There are in fact two variables: the number of protons and number of neutrons. It is also possible that the particles that make up the nucleus have their own rotation and so provide a physical explanation of the other magnetic numbers. The electrons making jumps above the nucleus of atoms do not need any energy to create a magnetic field. They each have a magnetic moment thus a magnetic field, even when they are integrated into the Nucleus. Their translation is not the cause of their magnetic field. Moreover, when an electron is ejected from the nucleus and before falling back under the action of the nucleus electric field, the structure of the nucleus is different. Another electron can in no way be ejected under the same conditions. This means that with a small effort, you can find all the categories needed to explain the spectrum of emission and absorption


22. The aether theory does not explain the neutrality of atoms, or their stability.


Answer: It is assumed that the electrons are integrated into the nuclei of atoms. The neutrality of nuclei is thus ensured. Particle of Space of aether play with regard to the nuclei of atoms exactly a role similar to that of molecules in the air on a soap bubble. The nuclei of atoms have stability resulting from the action of particle of Space inside and outside the nuclei, and from the condensation of particle of Space in these particles. It is not necessary to imagine some mythological particle that would causes attraction by exchange. Atoms have their own vibration perfectly defined by the number of particles they are made of which depend their size and their cohesion. The vibration is maintained by the incessant impacts of particle of Space of aether, but also by the waves that propagate in aether. Vibration may also be caused by chocks between atoms and with particles. The vibration of an atom has a spectrum strictly linked to its constitution. Their vibrations generate waves in aether. However, these waves cause a wave pressure on the obstacles that arise. Thus, the nuclei of atoms can not get closer than allowed by their state of vibration.


23. Photographs show the electron cloud surrounding the nucleus of atoms. It is no longer possible to question the model of official science.


Answer: The electrons are ejected at any moment from the atom's nuclei. This forms a kind of cloud around the nuclei. It is thus not necessary to call for some probabilistic nature of electrons. The situations are similar in both cases, but in the aether theory there is no paradox.


24. The wave nature of the electron is sufficiently demonstrated by the diffraction of electron beam through a metal foil. Once again, the experimental confirmation of the physics are so numerous and so perfect that it is absurd to question such a consistent paradigm.


Answer: a beam of homokinetic electrons has some resemblance to a train of waves. It is perfectly conceivable that the diffraction of electrons can result in overall properties of the beam. We shall not forget that the electrons move through aether. They shall cause waves, like a boat on the water and an aeroplane in the air. However, these waves themselves have an action on the electrons. It is quite possible that all these phenomena can explain the phenomenon of diffraction and interference of electrons. There is a considerable advantage over current science: it is not necessary to assume that electrons have a probability of presence. The cause of diffraction and interference would be in the aether. It shall be remembered that the electrons do not have the most fundamental properties of waves. First electrons do not obey the laws of Descartes, contrary to light. Secondly they do not have a determined propagation speed as all other wave phenomena, from the waves of the sea, to the light of the aether. The Josephson's effect could also be the result of the aether waves caused by the movement of electrons in the conductors.


25. The undulatory nature of protons and neutrons has been established in the same way. It is inconceivable to reject the acquisition of science at the time when it has the greatest success.


Answer: The analogy with the electrons shows that it shall be a similar phenomenon. The protons and neutrons have not the basic properties of waves. The effects should result from the action of these particles on a medium that can transmit waves. It is certain that the motion of particles in aether causes waves as a moving ship on the ocean raises waves. But there might be other solutions. For example, we may think that the aether is not the last level of matter and that electromagnetic fields are the result of motions of a lower matter level.



26. The theory of space does not explain electromagnetic phenomena.


Answer: The theory of the atmosphere does not explain gravity that is the cause of atmospheric pressure. There is no need to explain everything to understand some phenomena. It is true that assigning the cause of the magnetic field of conductors to the magnetic moment of electrons does not explain at all what is magnetic field. Much more I do not know what may be actually a magnetic moment. But the official physics attributes the magnetic field of the magnet to magnetic moments of electrons. I do not know that anyone has protested against this statement, which only postpone the explanation.


27. This theory does not explain phenomena related to the many particles recently discovered. It adds no new information that would explain the phenomena associated with antimatter. It does not meet any of the major problems of pure science. The aether theory provides no explanation of the origin of the universe.


Answer: I only envisaged a small part of physics. The theory of aether only deals with the light and gravity. In the same way, the theory of Pascal deals only the atmosphere, evermore it deals only with some phenomena of atmosphere. We can only explain what that means of measurement make available to us. Wishing to explain everything at once can only lead to the absurd to the philosopher's stone and the equation of the universe. Scientists are searching for the end of science. They have only found the end of their paradigm. I have not the slightest suggestion to make about the components of particles of matter. No more for antimatter. I have nothing to say about the origin of the universe.


As for particles, it would seem that the account is not there! Disturbing noises spread. But where is the Higgs Boson? It is true that it is easy to poke fun. What intrigues me is this desire to hide a negative result! Pure science is based on the Michelson and Morley failure to disclose the Lorenz’ether. There are negative results, but experiment can not be a failure. The experience gives the result it gives. There are no experimental failures. These are the theories that fail, not experiences.


28. Particle of Space agitating in the aether are in vacuum. We find the same difficulties as for the photon.


Answer: without aether, the atoms would move in vacuum. Nobody wonder. The atoms move through aether. Now the same problem occurs with particle of Space, so should we think that particle of Space themselves immersed in a fluid composed of even smaller corpuscles. And so on without conceivable limit. This is the system of Descartes. Thus science has no end. Sisyphus is not just a myth.


29. It is unthinkable that are thus reduced to undo decades of effort by a number of scientists. It is unthinkable that so patiently accumulated experiments, so carefully adjusted assumptions, so subtly assembled theories shall disappear in an instant behind so simple deductions and so basic assumptions. Theories of physics, mainly Relativity, are an authentic revolution, source of a new humanism. It is a qualitative leap, an unprecedented jump forward, an unprecedented renewal of history and philosophy. The inevitable Relativity has sufficiently demonstrated its inexhaustible fertility. It is completely useless to question a unique vision, a new ethical choice transforming the philosophy, art and science in unalterable ferments.


Answer: the unthinkable is frequently happening.