SIDESTEPPING 'NOW'.

SIDESTEPPING ‘NOW’.

https://www.rudebaguette.com/en/2025/06/scientists-achieve-the-impossible-mind-blowing-breakthrough-as-experts-create-light-from-empty-space-by-manipulating-time-and-space/

“Scientists from the University of Rostock and the University of Birmingham have discovered a way to create light from empty space by manipulating time and space.”

“They have found a way to generate flashes of light seemingly from the void, fundamentally altering our understanding of how time and space can interact.”

“This discovery not only challenges our existing understanding but also paves the way for new explorations into the fundamental principles of the universe. The implications of these findings could be far-reaching, potentially leading to advancements in technology and a deeper comprehension of the cosmos.”

“By leveraging the unique properties of time-influenced light, scientists could unlock new capabilities and push the boundaries of what is currently achievable. As we stand on the brink of these exciting developments, one must wonder: how will this unprecedented control over time and space shape the technologies of tomorrow?”

“With these new discoveries, we find ourselves at the cusp of a new era in physics, where the manipulation of these fundamental dimensions could lead to revolutionary changes in our understanding and interaction with the universe. As we ponder the future, the question remains: what other mysteries will the study of time and space unravel, and how will they transform our world?”

*******

These researchers may have stumbled upon something far more important than they realise.

They could be playing with the key to worlds beyond the present understanding, and even beyond the imagination of OUR scientists 

Worlds ‘where’ our ALIENS and their amazing vehicles come from.

Physicists discuss various aspects of ‘time travel' and some wonder why we haven't already been visited from other times.

WE HAVE BEEN VISITED, probably continuously and for a very long time!

But this isn't ‘time travel' in the way it's normally considered. It's related to the origin of virtual particles, which are actually real particles, just not from quite NOW.

THE ALIENS (and the virtual particles) come from another ‘slice’ of time, a physical reality in which the matter is not quite synchronous in time with the matter of our physical reality.

This is a concept OUR physicists have no knowledge of and cannot understand without a full grasp of the Ignis theory of light AND it's corollaries.

Unfortunately (I suppose) our scientists are unlikely to even begin on the path to learning the fundamentals of the physical reality of the Universe, as they are convinced they already know how it works and lack an ability to think clearly beyond their beliefs.

Perhaps THE ALIENS will teach them?

Do we even need to know?

Probably it's best if we don't!

NOTE: This addresses another physical reality in which the matter is not quite synchronous in time with the matter of our physical reality, and the two present rare, minute and almost undetectable, extremely transient interface remnants to each other.

YOUR DECISION

YOUR DECISION

https://www.ecoportal.net/en/solid-light-created-brighter-than-white/8398/

“Solid light” created for the first time in history — It’s brighter than white.

by Marcelo C. May 29, 2025

The article, in general, reflects the muddied thinking of mainstream physics today but no source for the information is given. Who were the scientists involved in this claimed breakthrough? Why are they not attributed? Strangely, even the article’s author’s full name is not provided.

“Scientists from the Institute of Nanotechnology of Lecce, in Italy”?

“by Marcelo C.”?

“When an electron is CHARGED TO ITS FULL CAPACITY, it explodes, expelling photons, and the levels of energy in these atoms are translated into the colors we see.”

Agnosco: Physics has routinely ignored Einstein’s concept of an electron comprising many photons, a concept my theory expands upon, but the foregoing paragraph incorporates the concept of the Ignis electron almost as if my theory had been read by the researchers involved!

It is the energy level of the originating electron, incorporated in its constituent photons, not the “energy of the atom”, that gives rise to the colour emitted.

“In this state, photons behave like particles and can reflect and emit light with an intensity and order that it appears almost ‘brighter than white’—not only in brightness, but in how precisely the light is structured.”

Agnosco: This is certainly a misunderstanding of experimental outcomes. Photons, when materialised, may themselves be reflected by material things but do not themselves reflect light with the exception of extremely rare occasions of coincidence of location and materialisation. Neither do they emit light [photons], and if they did, that light would be at a lower energy level (lower ‘frequency’) than the parent photons, not at a higher energy as implied by the article.

So, is there precisely and imprecisely ‘structured’ light? What does that statement mean?

“What was ONCE CONSIDERED pure energy without mass can behave like matter. If photons had mass, the universe would be a very different place.”

Agnosco: Physicists are very slowly moving towards the Ignis concept to some extent but they continue to exclude the transience of photon mass from their thinking.

Is it no longer considered by physicists that photons are pure energy, massless entities?

If photons simply ‘had’ mass the universe would indeed be a very different place, but they do not have influential mass on a continuous basis, as my theory explains.

Physicists may be shifting their thinking toward alignment with my theory without acknowledging its existence.

Even if this shift in thinking is actually happening, physicists continue in their failure to grasp the fundamental nature and simplicity of what is described in my theory and persist in an attempt to retain a mysterious aura for the basic physics of the universe.

You, as a physicist or as an intelligent independent thinker, may of course dismiss the Ignis theory out of hand (once you have considered it).

Perhaps it will be shown eventually that you failed to exercise your mind with sufficient studious discipline to understand the concepts involved, unable to set aside what you have previously believed to be true.

Why not avoid such an unfortunate outcome by seeking out and fully taking in my material on X and my blogger posts at:

https://photon-interactions.blogspot.com/?m=1

You will then be equipped to logically demolish my argument (which nobody has attempted to do since its publication in 2016), or to realise its validity.

Some may close their ears against the ideas I present but that will not make them go away. The ideas themselves are ‘in the wild’ and will persist until they are properly addressed even if I'm no longer extant.

Become part of a revolutionary update to physics or stand aside into irrelevance.

SPEED LIMIT

SPEED

Light is a portion of the range of electromagnetic energy propagating in discrete packets known as photons.

The Ignis Theory of Light

In the absence of interaction, each photon propagates in a perpetually repeating cycle through low mass/high energy and high mass/low energy phases, with individual photon mass and energy being immeasurably small.

At the beginning of each propagation cycle the intrinsic lowest mass of a photon is accelerated by the force exerted by its intrinsic maximum energy.

The initial [intrinsic] mass of a photon accumulates inertial mass under acceleration.

Inertial mass accumulation ceases when all photon energy is consumed when it is completely expressed as mass by its acceleration.

On cessation of acceleration the mass of a photon reverts to its intrinsic level, once again under the accelerating force of its full energy content, at the beginning of it's next cycle.

The high rate of acceleration of high energy photons produces a shorter repetition period than exhibited by low energy photons.

The repetition period of a photon is directly proportional to its energy, 

Each photon possesses an immeasurably small electric charge proportional to its instantaneous mass.

High energy photons exhibit higher mass and charge than low energy photons.

MATTER

In an early universe consisting initially of energy alone, positively and negatively charged photons interacted to cause the complex captured photon relationships that exist as matter. [Discussed elsewhere].

All particles of matter [atoms] are an intrinsically stable mass/charge relationship between the particular photons they comprise.

Speed Limitation

As an atom of matter within a space-ship, for example, is accelerated, each constituent photon comprising that matter gains additional energy and mass derived from the accelerating energy [chemical engine for instance].

If available, continued acceleration progressively increases the energy of any given photon, consequently progressively reducing its repetition period toward zero.

This zero/minimum repletion period would theoretically be attained first by the highest energy photons comprising the atom in question and progressively by lower energy associated photons if some catastrophic breakdown or unknown transition had not already occurred.

Beyond Light Speed

A source of acceleration beyond what is known in the universe would be necessary to accelerate matter past Light Speed if indeed matter could be seen as even existing at that point.

The mass/charge relationship established  within and allowing the separate existence of the atom in question could be seen to be catastrophically disrupted by the process previously discussed.

This appears likely to result in the rapid and total release of all of the energy aggregated to form the atom initially.

RADIATION PRESSURE

RADIATION PRESSURE

How do Einstein's 'packets of energy' FORCE molecules of matter apart in the process of thermal expansion?

Quite simply, on a regular repetitive basis each photon acquires momentary mass and charge.

For each photon, the acquired mass and charge are proportionate to its energy, which also determines its materialising repetition rate.

Photons MUST engage with matter via some mechanism that imparts FORCE to its molecules.

Physics has not yet explained how this comes about.

“When the photons that make up light strike an object, they exert a tiny amount of force on it, known as radiation pressure.”

[Agnosco: They call it this but have no idea of how it works. The Ignis photon with mass and charge explains this interaction.]

AGNOSCO'S MUSINGS

 AGNOSCO'S MUSINGS

While the occasional 'qualified' person has said the ideas in Quantum Mechanics – A Classical Interpretation cannot be right because physics has believed something different for over 100 years, there has not been one analysis challenging the facts or the logic of the argument put forward.

“The most important ideas are likely to be the ideas that are most disruptive.” Eric Weinstein

“What if in fact we had all sorts of things exactly backwards and completely wrong?” Eric Weinstein

“We need to be able to reinsert dissidents.” Eric Weinstein

Are my words beyond a reasoned challenge? Surely not.

And yet, no person, physicist or otherwise, has provided a reasoned rebuttal of any nature despite my theory having been viewed by many, many people since the publication of my website in February 2016.

Not one opposing argument has been put forward by any of the many scientists and science writers/journalists asked directly for comment.

I'm beginning to take the lack of dispute arising from my description of the nature and behavior of light as an unspoken endorsement of my theory.

It would be reasonable, I think, for me to seriously call into question the personal integrity and commitment to science of each physicist asked for comment.

Setting aside any other aspect of the hypothesis, my description of the Double Slit Experiment interpretation is simplicity incarnate and should be subject to counter argument if such an argument exists.

History may yet reveal that a great deal of time has been wasted in the pursuit of phantoms while a simple but ego confronting answer to many unresolved questions in physics lay at our feet.

“THE QUESTION IS, OF COURSE, IS IT GOING TO BE POSSIBLE TO AMALGAMATE EVERYTHING, AND MERELY DISCOVER THAT THIS WORLD REPRESENTS DIFFERENT ASPECTS OF ONE THING?”

Richard P. Feynman, The Feynman Lectures on Physics Vols 1-2 

At first I felt somewhat foolish in putting forward my unsophisticated ideas among the learned experts but being unable to fault my own logic, pressed ahead.

I wanted to know if the ideas were true.

Continuing thought in the interim has strengthened my confidence that a very simple adjustment to how we view the world at the micro level allows us to weave this universe of ours into an amazingly clear and elegant network of interconnected logic. This viewpoint provides tools permitting the visualization of every feature of reality that I have analyzed to this point in time.

A clear understanding of the simple mechanics of heat and expansion is only the beginning.

If I am able to do this, what could the truly great minds of this planet accomplish if they absorbed this very simple idea?

With a bit of a rethink, anyone smart enough to be a quantum physicist would be able to take the small conceptual change I suggest, and do far more with it than I would ever be able to do.

But unfortunately, we are creatures with firmly entrenched patterns of behavior in our lives.

Few are able to alter an established habit. Our subconscious mind fights relentlessly to prevent any revision of what we have previously decided is true.

Everything we have learned is part of our habit system, thus we adamantly refuse to engage with contrary ideas. Such things are a direct challenge to 'who we are', that is, to our ego. Our knowledge, to some degree, IS who we are.

My conscious self is not really in the driver's seat to the extent I prefer to think it is. Neither, I believe, is yours.

Few retain the neural plasticity enabling true learning or creative imagination beyond the formative years. Thus few truly new ideas arise from mature individuals in any field, specifically including the sciences. And we are far less adaptable to new ideas than we tend to believe ourselves to be.

As I wrote elsewhere some time ago, Ego > Sex > Food > Integrity. You may wish to alter the sequence of Sex and Food, but Ego always remains paramount.

Why should physicists risk investigating dangerous new ideas? The simple answer is 'because that is what thinkers do'. And in that direction lies the greatest chance of exciting discoveries.

With even small incremental gains in particle physics proving progressively more elusive and no clear path forward being apparent, why not have a quiet look at Ignis to see if there is really anything there? Do this as an interesting imaginative diversion at first, or even to ridicule what you find. Despite yourself you may discover an excitement you considered no longer possible for you.

Give it a try.

"A great nation is like a great man: When he makes a mistake, he realizes it. Having realized it, he admits it. Having admitted it, he corrects it. He considers those who point out his faults as his most benevolent teachers.”Lao Tzu - Source: Tao Te Ching,

NATURAL LANGUAGE EXPLANATIONS

NATURAL LANGUAGE EXPLANATIONS

Feynman’s insistence on ordinary language recalls the statement attributed to Einstein about not really understanding something unless you can explain it to your grandmother.

It is equally useful for testing the claims of others. If someone cannot explain something in plain natural language, then we should question whether they really do themselves understand what they profess…. 

In the words of Feynman, “It is possible to follow form and call it science, but that is pseudoscience.”

Choose any of the currently espoused

'theories' and:

a). Attempt to visualize what is claimed to be happening, and

b). Attempt to describe the ideas in natural language without the aid of mathematics.

 

THEORIES IN PHYSICS

THEORIES IN PHYSICS

Every stray thought is now considered a theory.

In my view, no idea can make a valid claim to being a theory unless an unbroken chain of causal events from established reality to the effects claimed by the theory can be explained in a logical, natural language progression of ideas.

Anything less is at best hypothetical and at worst mere speculation.

This does not discount the possibility of an inspiration giving a radical but correct answer without a conscious process of analysis supporting the conclusion provided.

In such rare instances, I suggest it likely that the truly amazing abilities of the subconscious mind have completed a detailed analysis without the process entering conscious awareness.

Having become aware of what appears to be a valid leap of understanding it then becomes obligatory to formulate and explain a process by which the known may be logically extended to align with the hypothesized conclusion reached.

Unless such a process can be successfully achieved, any claim to theoretical relevance must be set aside.

THE PLIGHT OF PHYSICS

 

THE PLIGHT OF PHYSICS

Particle Physics ceased being a scientific discipline in the early years of quantum mechanics.

This occurred gradually as, unable to explain their observations in connected, logical and visualizable terms using natural language, physicists began to speculate upon and accept causal mechanisms beyond our ability to understand.

Speculation about possible causes of observed phenomena is of course a valid method of investigation if clearly understood for its limitations.

The fundamental problem in Quantum Mechanics arose however when invalid assumptions led to a misinterpretation of experimental results, an interpretation which was accepted as true and used to form the basis for the development of evolving theories.

WAVES

Invalid assumptions:

Light propagates as a wave.

Light waves interact.

Interacting light waves add in amplitude in an algebraic manner.

The phase relationship between interacting light waves determines the amplitude of the resultant wave and thus the intensity of illumination on the screen.

Misinterpretation:

The observed results of the Double Slit Experiment were interpreted as being formed by the interaction of light waves, thus endorsing the wave theory of light.

Apparent anomalies arising from variations to the double slit experiment were interpreted as caused by light waves interfering with themselves through peculiar (and inexplicable) time events.

PARTICLES

An inability to conceive mechanisms by which particulate light could produce the observed outcome of the double slit experiment served to relegate the idea to a fallback position referred to only in instances where wave theory proved inadequate.

NOTE:

Photons, whether perceived as waves or particles, do not routinely interact.

If photons did indeed interact as perceived in the double slit experiment, such interaction would produce waves combining the energy of the waves involved.

Combining wave energy in such a manner would, with in-phase waves for example, produce a resultant wave of double the FREQUENCY, not double the AMPLITUDE of the initial waves.

If this actually occurred for waves of the lowest frequency able to be perceived by the human eye the resultant double frequency wave would be on the upper limit of our visual spectrum, with results for higher input frequencies being invisible to us.

Invalidly conflating conceived light waves with waves in material things such as water waves and sound waves in which matter is physically redistributed by mechanical energy passing through the material involved, was a serious error from which science has not yet recovered.

Perhaps there will be no recovery from this error. Those who control the dialogue are unlikely to destroy the edifice of which they are the masters.

If all of this makes sense to you and you would like further detail it can be found in my blogger posts at:

https://photon-interactions.blogspot.com/2024/10/light-light-interactions-in-search-of.html?m=1

and: https://photon-interactions.blogspot.com/2019/08/what-is-light-insearch-of-knowledge.html?m=1

and: https://photon-interactions.blogspot.com/2024/10/nobody-understands-quantum-mechanics-in.html?m=1 

with an archived copy of the website found here: https://photon-interactions.blogspot.com/2024/11/hereti

A RARE OPPORTUNITY

 

A RARE OPPORTUNITY

Warning: Unless you are able to devote significant time to what follows and have a serious interest in achieving a clear understanding of matter and energy, an understanding avoiding the nonsense now taught as quantum mechanics, you are well advised to not continue reading.

It is very reasonable to consider that any new concept put forward in physics is almost certainly wrong.

With that in mind I spread my radical photon theory as widely as I could within the scope of my very limited presence on the world stage, initially creating a website presenting the ideas and requesting critical review.

In writing emails directly to two prominent sceptics societies that advertised a mission to investigate and eliminate false claims liable to mislead the public, I requested their expert assistance in disproving my theory.

A copy of the text of the emails was included in my website when published to the internet.

No response to those emails was ever received.

Although the website appeared in February 2016 and I have since made appeals to scientists, science journalists and readers of social media such as X (Twitter) for its ideas to be refuted I have received no response attempting to logically counter my claims.

Over the intervening years a Twitter person claiming to be a physicist stated that my theory failed as it flew in the face of over a century of established knowledge, and he made that statement within minutes of the appearance of a post of mine directing readers to my website.

So much for considered scientific opinion.

Please note that eminent physicists lament an enduring hiatus in the progression of an understanding of fundamental physics.

Since that time I have introduced my ideas through blogger posts found at:

https://photon-interactions.blogspot.com/2024/10/light-light-interactions-in-search-of.html?m=1

and:

https://photon-interactions.blogspot.com/2019/08/what-is-light-insearch-of-knowledge.html?m=1

and:

https://photon-interactions.blogspot.com/2024/10/nobody-understands-quantum-mechanics-in.html?m=1

with an archived copy of the website found here:

https://photon-interactions.blogspot.com/2024/11/heretical-physics-ex-website.html?m=1

as well as other posts on X as Agnosco Ignis and on Facebook as Mikey Mikey.

If my theory is wrong, why has nobody logically detailed the flaws in my argument? Where are the expert opinions?

Many people on social media take great delight in denigrating the ideas of others and belittling their honest efforts at innovation. Not one has done so in this instance despite an exposure of over nine years. Why is this?

If my theory is correct, it's avoidance constitutes the greatest intellectual/integrity failure in the history of science.

The theory is relatively simple and capable of visualization in each aspect explored in the website, and an intelligent and logical mind with an understanding of high-school physics would be able to grasp its mechanisms, and it's implications for established quantum physics.

Such a mind, operating in a field outside professional physics and possessing widely accepted authority and respect in another discipline employing logical thought processes, is needed to open this theory to public debate.

That person would also require a rare ability and interest in considering disruptive ideas beyond their field of expertise in addition to sufficient confidence in their own fundamental abilities to challenge individuals of scientific eminence.

If you are able to meet or exceed the requirements outlined above please consider this an opportunity to assume an honorary but pivotal role in the establishment of a new age of human knowledge. The impact of the theory is enormous for science and for you if it is correct.

I seek expression of interest emailed to: questioning.quantum@gmail.com

Please join me in introducing a new aspect to our knowledge of the universe.

THE ORIGIN OF GRAVITY & DARK MATTER

 

ORIGIN OF GRAVITY & DARK MATTER

“A theory of quantum gravity is the outstanding goal of modern physics. It would reconcile two currently incompatible pillars of our description of the universe:

general relativity, our large-scale theory of gravity; and quantum mechanics, our microscopic account of nature’s other fundamental forces. Individually, these have been thoroughly tested, always passing with flying colors. …....

….... Yet try to combine them, and things fall apart.”

Source: New Scientist
https://search.app/Apr6A

Also:

https://www.advancedsciencenews.com/new-theory-suggests-gravity-is-not-a-fundamental-force/


The universe is not a hybrid composed of seemingly incompatible micro and macro components as perceived by physicists. The laws of physics will be found to be identical at the micro and macro levels by those who discover the true nature of matter and energy. Agnosco Ignis


ORIGIN OF GRAVITY

I agree that gravity is not a fundamental force, as claimed in the linked article, and while the thrust of the thinking in that article is in the right direction in seeing gravity as arising “from the ‘quantum-level behavior of ordinary matter’”, …....

….... the theorists need a little assistance.

FUNDAMENTALS

The nominal electric charge of a single electron is given as:

1.60217663 X 10-19 coulomb's.

Should it becomes possible for human scientists to actually measure the charge of individual electrons, it will be found that, rather than being a constant, the charge of electrons is variable and is determined by external factors.

It will be learned that, in the dynamic measured environment, each electron will exhibit a charge ranging from something less than to something greater than the nominal figure.

The highest charge exhibited by a given electron can be taken to represent it being in a ‘fully charged’ condition [as distinct from a saturated condition – discussed elsewhere].

It will also be understood that, under ‘normal’ dynamic circumstances, few, if any electrons exist in this ‘fully charged’ state.

This means that the charge of atomic protons is not fully offset by the sum of the charges of their associated electrons.

CONCLUSION

The charge exhibited in close proximity to an atomic structure will be negative, as determined by its associated electrons and this charge will act to repel close proximity molecules, which themselves exhibit a near-field negative charge.

At a greater distance from the atomic nucleus however, the same molecule will exhibit a positive charge resulting from the remnant proton charge remaining uncancelled by a less than fully charged electron field.

This remnant positive atomic charge exists as an attractive force upon all electrons and electron-associated matter in the universe.

This is gravitational attraction.

Please note:

Richard Feynman said in his lectures:

“Suppose that we have two unlikes that attract each other, a plus and a minus, and that they stick very close together. Suppose we have another charge some distance away. Would it feel any attraction?

It would feel practically none, because if the first two are equal in size, the attraction for the one and the repulsion for the other balance out. Therefore there is very little force at any appreciable distance.

 

To give an idea of how much stronger electricity is than gravitation, consider two grains of sand, a millimeter across, thirty meters apart.

If the force between them were not balanced, if everything attracted everything else instead of likes repelling, so that there were no cancellation, how much force would there be? There would be a force of three million tons between the two!

You see, there is very, very little excess or deficit of the number of negative or positive charges necessary to produce appreciable electrical effects.”

 

The above quote illustrates how a small deficit of photons in an ‘electron’ can cause the ‘weak’ force known as gravity. It may be read as agreeing that ‘gravity’ is equivalent to an uncancelled very small residue of electrical charge.

.The remaining un-neutralized residue of each atom’s positive electric field is viewed in this hypothesis as being responsible for the phenomenon known as gravity. If this is so, it can thus be seen that gravity may be viewed as a quantized phenomenon.

Although this is of course still the electric force, which is considered to be the ‘strong’ force, in this view of gravity we are looking at a small component only of this force arising from a photon deficit, hence the relative weakness of the attraction involved.

BY EXTENSION

An ion is defined as:

an atom or molecule with a net electric charge due to the loss or gain of one or more electrons.

It can now be seen that this definition must be modified to include a net electric charge arising from electrons exhibiting less than a full negative charge.

Positive ions attract negatively charged entities, that is, their positive charge attracts free electrons or other negatively charged matter as well as the electron field (and thus the entirety) of other atoms and operates over theoretically infinite distance.

PLEASE CONSIDER

Imagine an area of space containing positive ions only.

In the extreme case, such a field may consist entirely of protons.

A vast field of mutually repulsive protons (or any other positively charged entities) in constant, self repelling, ‘boiling’ turmoil will attract ‘normal’, electron-associated protons (molecules of normal matter) through attraction of the negative field of their electrons.

And it does so without emitting photons (energy) by which its presence may be detected.

Thus such a field of matter may only be detected through the effects of its attraction on normal matter that the vast collective field of its presence exerts.

This is Dark Matter.

An understanding of the described phenomenon provides a clear view of the nature and mechanism of Gravity.

THE ORIGIN OF MATTER

 

THE ORIGIN OF MATTER

https://www.earth.com/news/where-did-dark-matter-come-from-the-answer-may-be-surprisingly-simple/

According to the article:

“Dark matter started its life as near-massless relativistic particles, almost like light,”

“These particles, similar to the photons that carry light, hurtled about at near-light speed.”

*******

Photons do not ‘carry’ light, they ARE light, and as has been seen in THE NATURE OF THE PHOTON, they ARE near-massless relativistic particles.

The surprisingly simple answer explained in the Ignis theory accounts for the origin of all matter, including dark matter, both seen as arising from the interaction of Ignis photons as described in THE NATURE OF THE PHOTON and elsewhere.

Matter is a consequence of the interaction of moving charge carriers.

Because like charges repel and unlike charges attract it can be seen that The Big Bang or an equivalent origin for the energy of the known universe may have been a vast source of moving positive and negative charge carriers [energy ‘particles’] moving away from their origin or origins at the speed of light.

If these charge carriers comprised energy that propagated and behaved as described for photons in the Ignis model, described in THE NATURE OF THE PHOTON, it is seen as likely that the extensive and continuous spectrum of energy levels [‘frequencies’] produced in The Big Bang or equivalent source of energy would have resulted in a very wide range of deflection angles as charge carriers of the full range of energies [same polarity, equal or differing charge intensities and masses] repelled each other.

Because positive charges would have commenced to diverge from each other under the influence of their mutual repulsion and negative charges would have done likewise, this particle path deviation would have caused the subsequent convergence of a great variety of charge carriers.

Path coincidence of such deflected charge carriers would lead to cascading deflections in what would, essentially instantly, become a ‘boiling maelstrom’ of swirling energy and ultimately, it will be seen, particles of matter.

It is theorised that positively and negatively charged particles would be drawn together if their paths converged and their charge presences coincided instantaneously in time and location.

The outcome of such physical attraction would have, in each instance, been determined by the energy relationship between the particles involved, that is, their relative repetition rates [periods].

Should positive and negative particles of equal energy [same ‘frequency’ or period of repetition] coincide as described they will continue together on a path resulting from their angle of incidence.

They will then be closely associated particles appearing as one entity possessing the cyclic combined energy and mass of its constituents

This new ‘particle’ will exhibit zero charge externally to itself except at extremely short distances however* owing to the opposite and equal charges of its component parts masking each other’s charges.

*[Because no two particles may occupy the same ‘space’ they must, in these associations, exist in some manner adjacent to each other and thereby exhibit very small charge to points immediately beside each one on their side opposite the union.]

Note that the combined particles retain their prior individual identity and cyclic characteristics despite being ‘locked together’ by their charge relationship.

It should be clear that such a particle association continues to acquire mass and be limited in speed in an identical manner to that discussed for individual photons in the Ignis theory.

The combination particles described above would behave in the manner of the particle known as the neutrino. In possessing essentially zero exhibited charge, these entities would be normally neither attracted toward nor repelled by the charges presented by atoms and therefore may only very rarely interact with other matter.

Positive and negative charge carriers that differ only slightly in energy have almost identical transition periods [repetition rates]. If the material presence of two such items occurs simultaneously in close proximity to each other the mutual attraction will cause the two to unite as occurred in the case of the neutrino.

On subsequent materializations such entities will emerge slightly spatially separated from each other however, owing to their non-identical ‘periods’ [conventionally referred to as ‘wavelengths’].

If this occurs with sufficient propinquity the two physical particles will be drawn together once again by their charge attraction. This process will recur indefinitely, with a resultant ‘virtual’ period for the new object falling between the repetition times of the original energy components.

In a physical sense the positive and negative particles comprising the entity will be locked together as they move in unison at a resultant speed slightly below that of an unassociated energy entity [single photon].

This will happen because the physical presence of the higher energy particle will appear on each occurrence at a slightly earlier time (shorter distance) than the less energetic particle, drawing the first particle slightly forward physically, causing it to present a virtual period slightly longer than normal and the second particle slightly backward physically in space, causing it to present a slightly shorter virtual period than normal, thus producing an overall combined ‘measured’ speed (distance divided by time) that is lower than would otherwise be the case.

That is, the new [combined] particle of matter will travel at marginally less than the speed of light even though comprised of entities that individually attain the same maximum speed that limits all entities.

The minute material object formed in such a union will continue to exhibit a small residual charge as in the case of the neutrino but as the physical association of the particles is more distant in this case and their charges differ slightly, the charge affecting other objects will operate over a greater distance and be marginally dominated by that of the more energetic particle. This allows them to repel and attract other entities depending upon relative physical charge orientations and this may lead to the accumulation of equivalent entities causing the formation of more complex matter.

Such accumulations may conceptually consist of pairs or groups of pairs bound together in chains of progressively greater energy difference.

Particles of matter taking such a form may collectively travel at a considerably lower speed than the transition speed of its constituents, that is, well below the speed of light.

It is suggested that a process such as that described above ultimately results in the formation of ‘normal’ matter with a combined resultant spatial speed within the relatively slow range seen in complex matter.

Please realise that groups of vast numbers of diverse photons [photons of differing energy levels] in a primitive early universe form almost unbreakably strong connecting bonds between group members, bonds that tie them together to form a single unit of matter.

Once they have become mutually tethered amidst a chaotic process in the early universe [by the charge relationships already discussed] the intrinsic motion of the individual constituent photons comprising a particle of matter continues under the strict constraints of their mutual bonding relationship which prevents their free individual movement.

Almost no motion is imparted to the resultant hybrid entity [a particle of classical matter] as the motion of its constituent photons is constrained in all directions in an almost perfectly balanced manner.

Small, seemingly random movements of the material particle arising from ‘internal’ activity contribute to Brownian motion in conjunction with what are referred to elsewhere in the theory as thermal photons.

That is, any significant motion exhibited by the ‘physical’ particles so formed results from externally applied forces in accordance with the normal mechanical principles of physics in the macro material world.

The entire universe of matter, in all its forms, came about through incredibly strong charge-dependent bonds formed in the manner described above. These bonds are extremely difficult to break, and release the astounding amount of energy of all the photons combined in their formation when they are disrupted.

THE NATURE OF THE PHOTON

 

THE PHOTON

If you ‘have skin in the game’, that is, if you are a physicist who's ego and career are dependent on adherence to the enduring fundamental beliefs upon which quantum mechanics is founded and you therefore cannot afford to permit heretical ideas to take root in your mind …….

…….you must stop reading now.

“If we’ve been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. We’re no longer interested in finding out the truth. The bamboozle has captured us. - Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark”

Continuing beyond this point requires the serious physicist to: 

automatically and without analysis deny this challenge presented to their beliefs. thus renouncing their intellectual integrity, or

provide logical, natural language explanations for any errors found, or

become a leader in the new field of science in which the label of Quantum MECHANICS is fully justified.

*******

Scientists 'know', and accept that all matter consists entirely of energy but have no clear understanding of what that actually means.

Their 'theories' make no attempt to clarify the issue, nor do they show evidence of a serious intellectual engagement with understanding how energy became matter in the first place.

A belief that atoms of matter contain a tremendous amount of energy spurred the development of man-made nuclear fission in which atoms are split to release that energy as an incredibly powerful weapon.]

In the absence of an understanding of the nature and behavioral characteristics of energy [photons] it is not possible to comprehend the manner in which they interact with one another and combine to form what we consider to be normal matter.

Although I've been unable to discover a natural language logical description of the process involved other than my own [explained below], it is clear that micro world photon packets of energy engage, and interact with the matter of the macro world.

Clearly, this implies macro and micro entity characteristics capable of mutual engagement and interaction.

What remains to be disclosed is the specific nature of the characteristics enabling this interaction.

Those prepared to set aside preconceived notions about the nature of ‘light’ [photons], and also able to pursue an alternate concept for the nature and behavioral characteristics of photons in a thought experiment, should, find themselves intrigued to follow an interesting series of cascading, quite astoundingly simple consequences revealing almost obvious explanations for previously obscure phenomena.

•••••••

Consider a single photon as comprising a combination of matter and energy.

Picture an immeasurably small physical object with commensurate mass emitted from an atom and accelerated by the force of its associated energy.

Assume the photon mass is a minimum at the instant of emission and its energy is at a maximum.

With the minuscule mass accelerated by its associated relatively powerful emission energy it will increase in speed very rapidly, accumulating inertial mass as it does so.

As mass accumulates it increasingly opposes acceleration until a point is reached at which all of the photon's energy is expressed as mass and no further acceleration is possible.

With the cessation of acceleration, inertial mass no longer exists and photon mass reverts to its intrinsic minute value, once again subject to the accelerating force of its newly re-released energy component.

The photon in this model continues to be accelerated periodically as described, progressing rectilinearly as it cycles repeatedly through its materialized and energized phases in a precisely repeated process.

High energy photons are emitted under greater acceleration than low energy photons, causing them to achieve terminal speed more rapidly and reverting to the low-mass, high-energy condition over a shorter distance than lower energy photons.

Thus, higher energy photons have a shorter repetition period [seen as a higher frequency] than lower energy photons.

The photons normally interacting with the material world of our experience are considered, in this theory, to possess a negative charge commensurate with their instantaneous mass.

The charge of a photon is far below any measurable level.

To form some idea of just how minute this photon charge actually is we need to keep in mind Einstein's idea: “It is therefore to be assumed that the kinetic energy of an electron goes into the production of many light energy quanta." Einstein

And when we recall that the charge of an individual electron is itself immeasurably small, we gain some insight into why the photon, as only one of many making up an electron's charge [more on this in other documents] will permanently defy measurement.

That is, their charge at emission is almost zero, increasing to a maximum [still undetectably low] at the point of maximum speed and mass and reverting to almost zero with the shedding of inertial mass.

It is the charge of a photon that permits it to engage and interact with normal atomic matter, exerting an influence upon it and being influenced by the atomic matter commensurate with the instantaneous mass and charge of the photon and the mass/charge relationship between the interacting objects.

Understanding the characteristics and behavior of photons, their interactions leading to the formation of all matter and to the behavior of all matter throughout the universe suggests that professor Richard Feynman had an inspirational insight into reality when he said:

“You might wonder how such simple actions could produce such a complex world. It's because phenomena we see in the world are the result of an enormous intertwining of tremendous numbers of photon exchanges and interferences. Feynman, QED: The Strange Theory of Light and Matter”

A full grasp of the foregoing concepts leads an inquisitive and logical mind to an understanding of many, if not all, previously mysterious phenomena observed in reality and sets aside all previously accepted explanations relying upon such ideas as light waves going back in time to interfere with themselves.


[See: THE ORIGIN OF MATTER

ANYTHING BUT THE IGNIS MODEL

ANYTHING BUT THE IGNIS MODEL

It's interesting, and becoming quite amusing to watch physicists scrabble around to come up with ‘legitimate physics’ explanations for the reality that springs from my hypothesis, without acknowledging my model's existence.

They are floating fantasies such as ‘dark photons’ to otherwise explain a particle-based [non-wave based] explanation for the Double Slit, carefully avoiding exploration of my materialising photon model.

They are beginning to explore the concept that gravity is not a fundamental force but consider peculiar ideas rather than attempting to refute the simple reality discovered by pursuing the implications of my photon model.

They are beginning to re-examine dark matter/energy but continue to overlook possible explanations based on mundane, long-held knowledge regarding the characteristics of ions.

They persist in failing to apply what they already know about ‘acceleration due to gravity’ to pursue an explanation for the accelerating expansion of the universe consistent with observed results without the need for exotic forces/fields/materials.

Others pursue the nature of time and time dilation as if they have an understanding of the physical [its PHYSICS, remember] concepts involved, and abandon all connections with true physics in discussing ‘time travel’ as if it's a legitimate topic for science.

As far as I'm aware, not one of the concepts being promulgated by physicists today to explain the fundamental basis of the universe follows a logical chain of reasoning to arrive at their ideas.

According to accepted methods of determining such things, physicists are extremely intelligent people but since its publication in February 2016 none has been able to refute my hypothesis. There has not been one counter argument put forward, let alone a logically reasoned one, despite direct approaches to many well known scientists requesting comment.

While many physicists lament the lack of significant progress in their field they appear to have little appetite for ideas likely to be disruptive to their careers, and even more significantly, to their egos. This, rather than an intellectual deficit, would explain what appears to be a consensus on prohibiting professional public discussion of the Ignis model.

One very visible physicist who has ‘taken no pleasure’ from publicly demolishing [and correctly so] invalid hypothesis being promulgated in physics, has ignored my request to do the same to my ideas if she is able to do so. Why could that be? Has she simply taken pity on me for some reason?

Others, including skeptics societies claiming to protect the public from nonsensical ideas, have declined to respond to specific requests to analyze my concept and to reveal its flaws. Each scientist and science journalist approached has also declined to respond.

If my hypothesis is wrong, I need a logically consistent English language [not mathematical] exposure of its flaws. The persistent absence of such exposure since early 2016, despite appeals to many quarters, leads me to conclude that my hypothesis is likely to be valid.

If my hypothesis is consistent with reality and physicists fail to incorporate it into their work, any meaningful progress in physics will continue to be impeded and quantum physicists who persist with current paradigms will eventually be revealed as professionally incompetent.

One American Astrophysicist who actually studied what I propose was not only unable to find fault with it in concept or reasoning but despite being afflicted with terminal cancer, became excited by the prospects it presented for a clear understanding of the nature of reality. He requested an ongoing dialogue with me that continued for his final months.

People obsessed with parading their own superiority and who delight in the public humiliation of others have, aside from a couple dismissing alternative ideas without studying them, been conspicuously absent from comment.

It has been suggested that my ideas are very specifically and deliberately given no public attention because to analyze them publicly would expose them to wider consideration and potentially undermine the very basis of the careers of all credentialed physicists.

Humans have accomplished marvelous things in science and technology despite being in possession of a flawed understanding of the fundamental workings of the universe.

The pioneers in physics deserve the highest praise for the groundbreaking work they did in providing their successors with inspirational ideas with which to initiate their thinking.

Today's scientists, armed with information not available to their forebears, have no defence against their responsibility to re-analyze previous, less informed conclusions to reveal error and progress toward a genuine understanding.

Where has the truly analytical, what-if logical thinking gone?

Are we destined to continue along a path of pseudoscience and esoteric explanations while quite easily understood concepts could be available to all?

As the march of time erodes my remaining opportunities to obtain the necessary attention to the concepts I put forward, I am emboldened to relate them to Einstein’s great work.

An intelligent, open-minded and determined seeker of knowledge would discover endorsement of, AND PHYSICAL EXPLANATION FOR Einstein’s fundamental speed limit, his time dilation, his gravitational lensing and more, in my work, all arising from his photon as a discrete entity.

Photons with the characteristics I ascribe to them would, while challenging current paradigms, provide a tool to enable explanation of ALL physical phenomena.

EM interaction with ‘matter’, thermal expansion and other phenomena would be clearly understood in the light of a true understanding of the nature of a photon of energy.

I suggest that almost anyone capable of visualization and logical analysis [plus persistence beyond a ‘sound bite’ attention span] would be capable of building a comprehensive picture of the universe when armed with a clear photon understanding.

An understanding of the nature and behavior of the photon reveals all else in a progression of knowledge acquisition akin to the falling of dominoes.

I seek neither fame nor fortune. Agnosco Ignis can take credit, if any credit is due, for my ideas. My wish is to see them understood and acknowledged as valid before I go.

GRAVITY

THE ORIGIN OF GRAVITY

 https://www.advancedsciencenews.com/new-theory-suggests-gravity-is-not-a-fundamental-force/

I agree that gravity is not a fundamental force, as claimed in the linked article, and while the thrust of the thinking in that article is in the right direction in seeing gravity as arising “from the ‘quantum-level behavior of ordinary matter’”, …....

….... the theorists need a little assistance.

FUNDAMENTALS

The nominal electric charge of a single electron is given as:

1.60217663 X 10-19 coulomb's.

Should it becomes possible for human scientists to actually measure the charge of individual electrons, it will be found that, rather than being a constant, the charge of electrons is variable and is determined by external factors.

It will be learned that, in the dynamic measured environment, each electron will exhibit a charge ranging from something less than to something greater than the nominal figure.

The highest charge exhibited by a given electron can be taken to represent it being in a ‘fully charged’ condition [as distinct from a saturated condition – discussed elsewhere].

It will also be understood that, under ‘normal’ dynamic circumstances, few, if any electrons exist in this ‘fully charged’ state.

This means that the charge of atomic protons is not fully offset by the sum of the charges of their associated electrons.

CONCLUSION

The charge exhibited in close proximity to an atomic structure will be negative, as determined by its associated electrons and this charge will act to repel close proximity molecules, which themselves exhibit a near-field negative charge.

At a greater distance from the atomic nucleus however, the same molecule will exhibit a positive charge resulting from the remnant proton charge remaining uncancelled by a less than fully charged electron field.

This remnant positive atomic charge exists as an attractive force upon all electrons and electron-associated matter in the universe.

This is gravitational attraction.

Please note:

Richard Feynman said in his lectures:

“Suppose that we have two unlikes that attract each other, a plus and a minus, and that they stick very close together. Suppose we have another charge some distance away. Would it feel any attraction?

It would feel practically none, because if the first two are equal in size, the attraction for the one and the repulsion for the other balance out. Therefore there is very little force at any appreciable distance.

 

To give an idea of how much stronger electricity is than gravitation, consider two grains of sand, a millimeter across, thirty meters apart.

If the force between them were not balanced, if everything attracted everything else instead of likes repelling, so that there were no cancellation, how much force would there be? There would be a force of three million tons between the two!

You see, there is very, very little excess or deficit of the number of negative or positive charges necessary to produce appreciable electrical effects.”

 

The above quote illustrates how a small deficit of photons in an ‘electron’ can cause the ‘weak’ force known as gravity. It may be read as agreeing that ‘gravity’ is equivalent to an uncancelled very small residue of electrical charge.

The remaining un-neutralized residue of each atom’s positive electric field is viewed in this hypothesis as being responsible for the phenomenon known as gravity. If this is so, it can thus be seen that gravity may be viewed as a quantized phenomenon.

Although this is of course still the electric force, which is considered to be the ‘strong’ force, in this view of gravity we are looking at a small component only, merely a remnant of this force, arising from a photon deficit, hence the relative weakness of the attraction involved.

An understanding of the described phenomenon provides a clear view of the nature and mechanism of Gravity.

An Opportunity to Consider an Overlooked Possibility in Fundamental Physics

Regarding the article at https://forums.space.com/threads/einstein-wins-again-quarks-obey-relativity-laws-large-hadron-collider-finds.70166/

In his commentary on the matter, Unclear Engineer said:

"My thinking is that we are probably missing something important, so I support the research to look for things that might answer some of these questions."

"We will make progress faster if we don't fall into the trap of believing what we assume, so that we discard the thinking about other potential explanations."

My [Agnosco Ignis'] associated comment to https://forums.space.com said:

Regarding Time Dilation and Length Contraction:

I see these as concurrent effects of adding energy to matter [please bear with me]. The energy applied to the acceleration of matter alters the dynamics of the energy comprising that matter in such a manner as to cause physical events related to that matter to occur at a lower rate. This is equivalent to what is seen as a slowing of local time (time related to that particular matter).

Consider 'Time' as a measure of the rate at which physical events occur.

As a result, ALL physical events, such as those related to the ageing of a living creature, occur at a lower rate at a higher speed because 'event time', that is the portion of each 'period' available for 'things to happen' is reduced with increased speed.

An understanding of these concepts may be gained by anyone able to grok the hypothesis presented at:

https://photon-interactions.blogspot.com/2024/10/light-light-interactions-in-search-of.html  

and subsequently elaborated upon in an included link to deal with a range of concepts such as Time Dilation and the fundamental nature of the speed limitation imposed upon matter.

I'm most encouraged to read the thoughts of 'Unclear Engineer' as expressed in this article, who's thinking is far from unclear to me. Such an individual, seemingly unspoiled by formal quantum 'education' would be capable of dissecting 'Quantum Mechanics - A Classical Interpretation' to perhaps conclude, as did one American astrophysicist (sadly now deceased) that there is merit in the ideas presented. As a retired astrophysicist suffering from terminal cancer and no longer having any 'skin in the game' in terms of the profession, he wrote to me that after detailed close study and constant review he had been unable to find a flaw in the reasoning presented and insisted that I continued to promulgate my ideas.

Being fundamentally disruptive to current 'theories', this description of a Universe in which all sub-atomic level events comply with the fundamentals of classical physics has not been pursued by proponents of current theories despite its wide promulgation. Interestingly, over the period from publication of the website in February 2016 until now [February 2025], there has not been one counter argument put forward, let alone a logically reasoned one, despite direct approaches to many well known scientists requesting comment.

I invite Unclear Engineer and other keen minds present on this forum to critically consider the hypothesis I put forward and respond through this forum and/or to the email address found in the linked Blogger post.

Too simple to be true? Maybe so. Please let me know.

Agnosco

*******

My attempts to seek Unclear Engineer and other Space.com contributor consideration of this classical interpretation of quantum mechanics has been rebuffed.

Space.com site administrators refuse to permit any link allowing access to this hypothesis to be posted to the site.

Why is this?