full moon (pleine lune)

I have found that in general, the academic community will not entertain criticism of Einstein or the possibility of an Aether and neither will journals publish papers on the subject, hence the reasons for this website, which I hope will initiate more debate on the subject.

I welcome comments and questions and will reply if time allows.

Email : rfn@btconnect.com

I also give lectures on my theories if conditions are acceptable.

All four theories (ATVE September 2000, ATG June 2004, Nature of Time Oct 2004, and ATCE December 1999) are the original work of R.F.Norgan who edits and owns this web site.



Everyone knows the original Twins paradox (TP) experiment where one identical twin B leaves Earth on a rocket ship and eventually returns after many
years to his stay-at-home twin A on Earth.
Now Special Relativity states that time dilation is observed in a different inertial reference frame (IRF) to that of the observer. Simply, if A and B are two identical clocks moving at constant velocity relative to each other then clock A will observe clock B to run relatively slow. However it is also true that clock B will observe clock A to run relatively slow. Hence both clocks paradoxically observe each other to run slow. This absurdity, called the Dingle paradox, is the crux of the Twins Paradox. The Dingle paradox suffers from the practical difficulty that at least one reading of each clock by the other must be made over a separation distance. This causes difficulties as to whether the observed effects are real, observational or what. The Twins Paradox experiment overcomes this problem as it consists of a double out and return Dingle experiment with the benefit that it eliminates observations over distance to give an undisputable real result. Accelerations
In the standard version of the TP the travelling twin accelerates three times, once away from Earth then at the point of velocity reversal and finally before touch down on Earth.
Now it is the case that relative velocity for the purposes of SR must be constant, ie both the observer and the observed clock must inhabit IRFs. Hence SR cannot apply to accelerating objects and so the accelerations in the standard TP are an embarrassment to SR. However the accelerations can be removed by modifying the experiment to employ three clocks instead of two such that clock B makes the outward journey and passes its reading on to clock C which then makes the return journey to clock A. Nevertheless SR still has difficulty with the prediction of clock B, C of clock A at the final reading.

The SR Prediction of the TP

Special relativity and alternative theories agree on the prediction of clock A on the final reading of the other clock(s) and this prediction agrees with observation. Different theories disagree in their prediction of the out and return clock of the relative reading of A.
Although it is only strictly necessary to read and compare clocks at the final co-incidence it is very instructive for the clocks to make continuous readings of each other over the separation distance.
At the reversal point clock B has accumulated a certain count n. From the point of view of B clock A will be reading (n − x) where the factor x is due to SR predicted time dilation. As clock B covers the same distance back to A at the same velocity V clock B will read 2n at the final co-incidence. From the point of view of B clock A will then read (2n − 2x due to further time dilation. In fact A reads (2n + 2x). Thus SR makes an incorrect prediction.

The Aether Theory of Velocity Effects (ATVE)

See the full paper on the ATVE.
The ATVE states that the velocity effects of length contraction, time dilation and mass increase apply only to matter systems and are real effects. The Aether velocity effect factor is identical to the Lorenz factor except that the relevant velocity is Aether velocity as opposed to relative velocity. An observer sees the ratio of the real effect on the observed object to the real effect on his own material units.
When the Aether velocity of the observer is a small fraction of c (the Aether velocity of the solar system is believed to be 0.0012c) the difference in the reading of two identical clocks of the duration between two events is given by:- − Vd/2c2 − VeAdpA/c
where d is the distance moved by clock B through a reference IRF inhabited by clock A and dpA is the current distance between the object and an observer in the ref. IRF but in-line with the direction of the Aether velocity of the ref. IRF. In the case of the Twins Paradox dpA is zero at the final reading. In addition the ATVE describes an Aether communication effect (ACE) due to the anisotropy of the speed of light over the separation distance which is +VeAdpA/c (see the ATVE paper). Under all observations the real ratio effect and ACE combine to give:- 1/2c2 Z f(V)δd (2) Thus velocity V can be changing, i.e. the object clock can be accelerating to any degree and direction over the course of the experiment. Thus the ATVE can perfectly handle the original TP with accelerations. The ATVE explanation Where the observer (clock A) is in the reference IRF eqn 2 predicts his observation of clock B no matter that clock B moves and accelerates in any fashion so long as the pattern is known. If clock A is also accelerating the time dilation of clock A relative to the ref. IRF can also be calculated and the difference in time dilation calculated for clocks A and B is the relative time dilation between the two. When the observation is reversed and clock B observes clock A the ACE of clock B needs to be converted into ref. IRF velocities. ACE for clock B then becomes:- Vd/c 2 + VeAdpA/c 2 (see the ATVE paper) (3) 2 The combination of the real effect (eqn 1 and ACE (eqn. 3) then becomes +V d/2c 2 which is the inverse of that observed from the reference IRF as expected. If clock B inhabits IRFs both in the outward and the return journey then observations of clock A can be made directly from B in which case eqn. 1 is employed. However the change of observation effect at the velocity reversal creates a one off observation effect of 2V d/c2 which modifies observations on the return journey. The final reading agrees with that of clock A. The ATVE predictions agree with observations throughout the TP experiment for distance d inequations 1,2 and 3 can take any value. Your comments are welcome. rfn@btconnect.com If you agree with the ATVE explanation of the TP please link your website to this one RELATIVITY IS A NONSENSE 3


Classification no. 03.30.+p by R F Norgan, 4 High St, Graveley, Nr. Hitchin, Herts. Email: rfn@btconnect.com


The sole postulate of the ATVE is the substantial luminiferous Aether which SR denies. The Lorenz Transforms are generated from the conclusions by J. S. Bell who, using Maxwells equations, demonstrated that length contraction and time dilation are real effects resulting from the movement of an atom through the Aether. The ratio of the real effects upon two material bodies, the observer and the observed object, together with a separate observation effect are derived from the Lorenz Transforms. The combination of the real and the observation effect gives a velocity effect function which is identical to that of SR for non-accelerating bodies. However the ATVE has the benefit of intrinsically coping with the acceleration of matter bodies. The ATVE is not subject to the paradoxes to which SR is considered subject. The restoration of the Aether as an acceptable hypothesis for Space is the major benefit of the theory.


For the purposes of this paper Space is postulated to be a physical substance, different to any other, which occupies every point in Space. The Aether is therefore the substance (and the only substance) which determines volume and hence distance. The Aether is an absolute frame of reference albeit nonEuclidean in nature. The electric, magnetic and gravitational potentials are supported at each and every point by the Aether substance. These potentials are propagated through the Aether at the local speed of light, which is determined by the Aether substance at that locality. It follows that matter moves through the Aether at absolute velocities. Relative velocities are only relevant in collisions between bodies and in observations between bodies. Absolute velocities create absolute, ie real, velocity effects in matter bodies. The Aether is a general hypothesis which is not specific to the ATVE. It is also the basis of many unrelated theories, eg Gravity, Inertia, Cosmic Expansion, the support and propagation of the electric and the magnetic potentials etc.

Although the Aether is a non-Euclidean reference frame, for simplicity of calculation the ATVE takes it to be Euclidean which is substantially true where the gravitational field is weak. With this simplification the Aether approximates to a Euclidean reference frame which is intrinsically inertial as no more important body exists relative to which acceleration or rotation of the Aether is meaningful.


From Maxwells equations Bell calculated the change in the electro-magnetic fields surrounding the charge of a hydrogen atom nucleous as a function of velocity. This work had already been previously carried out by O. Heaviside. Bell does not specify to what that velocity is relative. However he equates his matter contraction result to the Fitzgerald-Lorenz contraction effect (FLCE) which implies that it is the Aether velocity. He then calculated the modification of the orbit of the electron in a hydrogen atom in response to the changing fields. Bell found that the orbit was compressed in the direction of velocity by the factor p 1 − V 2/c2 . As matter length is determined by the shape of the outer electron orbits Bell came to the conclusion that all matter contracted to the same degree. This effect had previously been suggested on an empirical basis by G F Fitzgerald [1] and later by Lorenz and has since been known as the FLCE. Bells work gives the neccessary scientific basis to the empirical suggestion. This effect is given as:- LIRF = L0/γe (1) where γe = 1/ p 1 − V 2 e /c2 and Ve is the Aether velocity. γe is the Aether velocity effect function. Bell also determined that the period of the orbit of the electron dilated according to the factor 1/ p 1 − V 2/c2 (the Larmor time dilation effect). 2 It is only a trivial extension to accept that time for matter systems in general is exampled by the time of the electron orbit. If the orbit period of the electron is considered as a time unit then the orbit period of a moving atom measured in the orbit periods of an atom stationary in the Aether will measure greater than one. Thus the general equation for time dilation is:- t0 = tIRF γe (2) where t and t0 are measures of time using a standard clock. Length contraction and time dilation are therefore real effects. A real effect is defined as that which occurs to an object irrespective of the presence or otherwise of any other object. Real effects can only be observed directly in the absence of observation effects. The Kennedy-Thorndike experiment [5] is often cited as an experiment which disproves the FLCE. However this is not the case when the time dilation of the frequency source is taken in to account, as it must be. Then a null prediction is achieved to agree with observation.


Each matter body moving through the Aether experiences real velocity effects as a function of its own Aether velocity as described by eqns 1 and 2. The Aether velocity effect on mass is derived later. Thus two objects, A and B moving at Aether velocities VA and VB experience, for example, time dilations of tA = t0γA and tB = t0γB Assuming that A and B are identical clocks, then when one clock observes the time keeping of the other clock, ignoring for the moment observational effects, the observing clock will see the ratio of their two time units. Therefore, as seen from A of B using As clock as standard we have tA/tB = s 1 − V 2 eB/c2 1 − V 2 eA/c2 (3) The reciprocal observation of B by A naturally gives the inverse of the above. The above ratio is equally but inversely applicable to matter length. It therefore, at first sight, seems impossible for an observer in one IRF to predict their observations of an object in a second IRF from the above equations as they contain two unknown velocities VeA and VeB .


The Lorenz transforms are derived in a similar although partly different manner to that employed by Einstein in his 1905 paper. Thus their entire derivation is not fully explained in this paper in those areas where it duplicates the previous work of Einstein.

The dimensions of Space are not affected by the movement of matter through it. But the measure of Space is naturally affected by a change in the measuring units of time and distance, ie clocks and rods, employed by a moving observer. Hence the dimensions of Space are peculiar to each observer. Space as viewed by an observer may be considered as a pseudo-Aether whose dimensions are related to the true Aether by a function of the Aether velocity of the observer. This pseudo-Aether or inertial reference frame is purely an effect of the circumstances of the observer.

As an example an observer at rest in the Aether will observe the contraction of bodies at rest in an IRF which is moving through the Aether but he will not observe a contraction of the Space that separates these bodies. However those bodies within that IRF will observe the dimension of these Space separations differently to the Aether observer. Now consider that the Aether is frame K in the construction employed by Einstein and a reference IRF is frame k where frame k is moving at velocity V along the x axis of K. The x axes of both frames are in line with each other.

The co-ordinates of K are given by x, y, z, and t while the co-ordinates of k are given by ξ, η, ζ and τ .

Distance is measured by an observer in each frame by means of his standard distance measuring rod. The relative length of these two rods in the x direction is given by eqn.1 where L0 is matter length in frame K. Thus distances in the ξ direction in k, either determined by matter as with rods or measured by matter rods, will appear contracted when viewed in frame K. A point in k will also be related to K by x − vt. Thus the relationship between the x dimensions of frames K and k are given as:- ξ = γe(x − vt) (4) Axes y and z are not affected as the measuring rods are not contracted in those directions. Thus:- η = y (5) and ζ = z (6) Identical to Einsteins construction a light pulse is emmitted from the origin of k, which is coincident with the origin of K, at time t0. This pulse reflects from an object at postion x 0 at time tr and returns to the origin at time t2 where (t2 − t0) = tx. The velocity of the ray in the outward direction is c − v and in the return direction it is c + v. Thus period tx is given by 2x 0γ 2 e /c or, taking into account the FLCE in the x direction where ξ = γex 0 , then tx = 2ξγe/c. But 2ξ/c = τx, thus:- tx = γeτx 4 It is easily shown that the above eqn. is equally true for the y and z axes thus:- t = γeτ Which is identical to eqn.2 where t = t0. The assumed reflection of the ray occurs at time tm where tm = (t0 + t2)/2 but actually occurs at time tr. Thus:- tm − tr = x 0 v/(c 2 − v 2 ) Putting x 0 = x − vt we have tr = γ 2 e (tm − xv/c2 ) and putting tr = γeτr gives:- τr = γ(tm − vx/c2 ) (7)

Thus the Lorenz transformation equations are generated from the basis of the Aether but with the crucial difference that they are not reciprocal. They also only relate Aether dimensions to those measured in reference IRFs. J S Bell also arrived at the Aether derived Lorenz Transforms although via a different route.

The uniformity of IRFs to an observer

It was shown by Einstein that after a transformation of the fundamental electro-magnetic equations by the Lorenz Transforms that Maxwells equations describing electro-magnetism are invariant between IRFs. The kinematic laws are equally shown to be invariant between IRFs. It is therefore a general result of the Lorenz Transforms that the Laws of Physics are invariant between IRFs. Thus a principle, the Principle of Invariance, can be constructed which states: A frame in uniform motion relative to the Aether cannot be distinguished from the Aether by any local physical experiment whatever. It also follows from the Principle that any frame cannot be distinguished from any other.

This principle is very similar to the Principle of Special Relativity. The only difference being that the Aether is considered a special or preferred frame even though the specialty or preference of the Aether frame from an IRF is not detectable.

Although local experiments cannot detect a difference, non-local experiments are able to do so. For example the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMBR) is deemed to issue from all directions of Space at equal intensities and frequencies. However a dipole anisotropy is detected in the frequency of the radiation which can be most simply explained as a Doppler effect due to the velocity of the Earth relative to the source of the CMBR radiation. This velocity is calculated to be approximately 360km/s. The question remains unanswered as to the exact source of the radiation but it is likely to either have come either from the Aether itself, see the later chapter on Cosmic Expansion, or from material sources which effectively mark the position of the Aether. Thus it is reasonable to consider the velocity of 360km/s to be relative to the Aether, for what else could it be relative to. The detection of our own Aether velocity requires that a physical Aether must exist.


For simplicity the co-ordinate symbols for the two frames K and k are now given as:- For frame K; x, y, z and t. For frame k; x 0 , y0 , z0 and t 0 . The velocity of an object viewed from K is u and the same object viewed from k is u 0 . The relative velocity between the two frames is v which lies in the x direction. Velocity transformations are deduced as standard from the Lorenz transformations. They are:- ux = v + u 0 x (1 + vu0 x /c2 ) , uy, uz = u 0 y , u0 z γv(1 + vu0 x /c2 ) Putting u 2 = u 2 x + u 2 y + u 2 z and u 2 = u 02 x + u 02 y + u 02 z gives:- s 1 − u 02 x /c2 1 − u 2/c2 (1 + u 0 x v/c2 ) p 1 − v 2/c2 (8)

These equations enable the equation for mass as a function of Aether velocity to be determined on a consideration of the conservation of momentum using identical logic to that of Einstein in his original paper. Thus:- m = m0γe (9)

Frame K is the Aether and frame k is now called the reference frame A. The observed object B may be accelerating as it does not need to inhabit an IRF. Thus u = VeB, u0 = V, and v = VeA. Eqn. 8 can be rewritten thus:-

s 1 − V 2 eB/c2 1 − V 2 eA/c2

p 1 − V 2/c2 (1 + VxVeA/c2 ) (10) Thus eqn.3 can now be given as:- tB/tA = p 1 − V 2/c2 (1 + VxVeA/c2 ) (11)

The above function applies equally to matter length and mass as well as time. For low values of VA ( which is applicable to the solar system) eqn. 11 can be shown in a different form and becomes:-

6 tA/tB = 1 − V 2 /2c 2 − VAVx/c2 (12) The measured time difference is (TA − TB) = TA[V 2/2c 2 + VAVx/c2 ] As d = TA/V and dx = TA/Vx we also have (TA − TB) = dV/2c 2 + VAdx/c2 (13)

The velocity effect cannot yet be calculated as the function still involves an unknown Aether velocity in the right-hand part of the function. This function, VAdx/c2 , is called the Matter Transport Effect. It is a function of the instantaneous distance between B and A but in line with the Aether velocity of the reference IRF A. In practice it is the difference in dx between two observations which is of greater significance.

However if dx is zero, as it is at the final reading of the Twins Paradox class of experiments, then a real prediction is produced directly from eqn.7. The Matter Transport Effect can be seen to be the time taken for light to traverse distance dx times the Aether velocity of the reference IRF. When a clock is moved between two points, ie Slow Transportation, the difference in traverse time from the expectation is the Matter Transport effect. If two readings are taken of a clock over a period then the first reading of this function is subtracted from the second reading. In that case the Matter Transport Effect is a function of the difference in distance dx.


The observation of real effects upon bodies by an observer body is dependant on the process of observation over a separation distance and at a communication velocity which is ideally the speed of light. Allowance must be made for the time delay for light to travel between the two bodies at the assumed speed of light. However the time of reflection from the observed body is not equal to tm = (τ0 + τ2)/2. The difference is given by eqn.7 in the form:- τr − τm = −γevx/c2

From eqn.4 ξ = γex when t is zero. This assumption can be made as the communication is not dependant on the relative velocity of the bodies involved but merely on the instantaneous separation distance at the point of reflection. Thus the above equation becomes:- τr − τm = tACE = −vξ/c2

Eqn. 15 is the Aether Communication effect for an observer in frame k. The sign of ACE depends upon whether the communication is reading or setting the clock. From now on the more usual co-ordinates of x, y, z and t are employed to describe frame k, the refence IRF. Now dx = TAVx and d = TAV.

Therefore tACE = TAVxVA/c2 . (16) The ratio of the observed time period T when reading the moving clock to the observers clock reading (ignoring temporarily all other effects) is TB TA = 1 + VxVA/c2 . As the observer is unaware of ACE he must conclude that all differences in the observed time period are due to a difference between the time units of the two clocks. He therefore concludes that tA tB = 1 + VxVA/c2

Where tA and tB are the time units of his own clock A and the observed clock B. ACE modifies all measurements of real effects made over non-zero distance. A measure of the delay times must be undertaken for every interrogation of the distant clock.


The combination of the Real and the Communication effects are given in the two forms.

Form 1

Equation 11 for the real effect is combined with eqn. 17, the communication effect, to give simply tB/tA = p 1 − V2/c 2

Form 2

The Real Effect eqn.13 and the Aether Communication effect eqn. 15 are combined thus:- TA − TB = dV/2c 2 + VAdp/c2 − VAdp/c2 = dV/2c2

The Matter Transport Effect and ACE always exactly cancel each other under all conditions of observing a matter body. Thus a totally real result always arises when an observed clock is read irrespective of its location relative to the observer.

If the constant velocity V is replaced with a variable function of V then we have (TA − TB) = 1 2c 2 Z f(V )δd

Thus the observed clock may be accelerating to any degree, direction or duration within the period of the observation. If the observer A is accelerating then its time dilation can be equally calculated, relative to a chosen IRF, over the same observation period and subtracted from that of clock B in order to obtain the difference. Thus within the ATVE there is total freedom for either the observed or the observer clock to accelerate.


The ACE of the accelerating clock B is −TBVBVpB/c2 From eqn. 5 this can be converted to velocities through IRF A thus:- tACE = TB(V 2 + VAVpA)/c2 which gives:- tACE = dV 2 /c2 + dpAVA/c2 (21) The combination of eqn.15 and eqn. 8 gives the observation of an accelerating clock B upon a clock in IRF A as:- TA − TB = −dV 2 /2c

Being the observation of B upon A it is the inverse of what A sees of B, which is to be expected.

The varying velocity of B in IRF A can be calculated from the measured acceleration. For example if B moves in a circle where the instantaneous velocity is always V then T V 2/c2 becomes T.acc.R/c2 where R is the radius of the circle.


As relative velocity is identical for two bodies moving with respect to each other the observed velocity effects are also identical as predicted both by the ATVE and SR. If the two bodies are clocks observing time dilation in the other they will therefore both observe the other clock to be running slow. In reality it is not possible for two clocks to both run slow relative to each other. Several SR explanations of this paradox have been submitted but none have been judged to be satisfactory. The ATVE explanation is more easily understood if the situation is simplified somewhat. Assume clock A and clock B have Aether velocities VA and VB respectively and that the two velocities are in line with the two clocks also separated by a certain distance along the same line. The two Aether velocities are both small fractions of c such that powers of c above two can be ignored. These simplifications do not substantially affect the argument. The time dilation suffered by each clock causes the measure of the time between two events to be less than that measured by a clock stationary in the Aether. The fractional diminution is given by V 2 A/2c 2 and V 2 B/2c 2 respectively according to eqn.2. Each clock will observe the difference between these two real effects in the absence of the observation effect ACE. The observation effect ACE is given as VxVN /c2 where N is either A or B according to the observer, where Vx = Vr = (VB − VA). Thus the diminution observed as a fraction of a time period by clock A is:- (TA − TB)/TA = [V 2 B − V 2 A − 2VrVA]/2c 2 For B as the observer the suffixes A and B are interchanged. The above equation reduces to V 2 r /2c 2 for both A and B as the observer as expected. The ratio of the real effects and the observation effect is given by:- (VA + VB)/2VA At the extremes if VA is zero then A observes only a real effect of clock B, where-as clock B observes an observation effect which is twice the observed real effect and of opposite sign. Thus velocity effect observations are a mix of real and observational effects depending on the exact Aether velocities involved. If clock A observes a real effect greater than the observation effect then clock B observes the opposite.


The essence of the twins paradox (TP) is that two identical clocks meet and then take different routes through Space, one route being longer than the other, to a second meeting. The two clocks then compare their measure of the time period between the two meetings. Because one clock travels further than the other it therefore does so at a higher average velocity which subjects that clock to time dilation relative to the other clock. It is necessary that at least one clock changes velocity during the experiment. In the simplest version of the TP clock A moves at constant velocity. Clock B leaves A after synchronisation, at a constant relative velocity V . At a certain distance d clock B accelerates in the direction of A up to a constant velocity V in the direction of A. Clocks A and B compare readings at their final co-incidence over zero distance.

Both SR and the ATVE agree on the predictions of clock A of the reading of clock B but they do not agree on the reading of clock A as seen by clock B. With SR both A and B predict that the other clock will be relatively slow, which is of course not possible. This prediction results from the fact that velocity within SR is purely relative rather than absolute. Thus observations between IRFs are equally reciprocal. In the ATVE velocities are absolute and so absolute differences in time do occur.

According to the ATVE clock B will be slow relative to clock A by V d/c2 , ignoring the period of acceleration where the relative velocity is less than V for a short period. Clock B must recognise that it has accelerated in order to make this prediction. The direction of clock B relative to a line between A and B is not material as neither is the constancy of V through the reference IRF. Eqn 13 calculates the total time dilation. If the observer A is also accelerating as is an observer on Earth then his time dilation can be calculated separately by the same equation and the difference taken. THE REASONS WHY SPECIAL RELATIVITY IS AN UNSATISFACTORY THEORY Special relativity is based upon the Principle of Special relativity which states:- A frame in uniform translatory motion relative to an inertial frame cannot be distinguished from that frame by any physical experiment whatsoever. From this principle Einstein derived two postulates :-

  1. The speed of light (SOL) is a constant in all directions in all inertial reference frames and
  2. No one IRF is a more special than any other.

    Thus SR denies the existence of the Aether. Einstein also assumed that what we observe is the true and total picture of what is there.

    Thus if we always measure the speed of light to be a constant in all IRFs SR assumes that we are measuring the true SOL.

    SR predicts the velocity effects of length contraction, time dilation and mass increase as observed changes between the dimensions of IRFs and as a function of their relative velocity.

    Measuring the Speed of Light

    The normal method of measuring velocity is to time the passage of the object in question over a measured distance. A timer is started when the object crosses the start of the track and is stopped when it crosses the end. A difficulty arises in that that where-ever the timer is positioned it must be a distance from at least one end of the track with a resultant communication delay over that distance even at the speed of light. There is a simple method of communicating with the timer at the SOL. A beam splitter at the start of the track splits the incoming beam so that one half goes down the track and the other half is directed to start the timer. At the end of the track the beam is reflected from a mirror back to stop the timer.

    It is obvious that where the track beam and the timer start beam run in parallel they will take identical times to move that distance under all circumstances and this tells us nothing of the speed of light. Parallel running is therefore eliminated by positioning the timer exactly at the beam-splitter. The inescapable result is that the timer is now measuring the out and return journey of the light beam rather than the intended one way journey. The conclusion being that it is not possible to measure the local one-way speed of light.

    Furthermore the track distance, being determined by a matter rod measuring unit is subject to the FLCE effect. The combination of a two way measure and the FLCE result in a constant measure of the SOL irrespective of the magnitude of its one way velocity.

    The movement of the measuring clock from one end of the measurement track to the other removes the need for communication to the clock. However, as has been seen, the movement of a clock generates an effect equal to that of a communication by light ray. An example of this type of measurement is the Ole Roemer measure of the SOL across the Earths orbit.

    Special relativity does not describe Space in a logical manner or as we observe it.

    The vector addition of photon and matter velocities

    According to SR the light from a star leaves at a velocity relative to the star of c. A rocket approaches the star at velocity V . According to the mathematics of the addition of vectors the starlight should strike the rocket at velocity c + V . However SR states that the strike velocity is c. In other words c+V = c. It should be noted that this is not a consequence of SR but the main postulate of the theory. Thus we are either required to accept that the foundation of our mathematics is wrong or we must accept that Space is constructed in such a way that it is impossible to envisage.

    In Aether theory the star and the rocket have Aether velocities of VeS and VeR respectively where the vector difference is the relative velocity V . The true one way velocity of light relative to the star and the rocket is the vector difference between the Aether velocity of each and the Aether propagation constant c. Thus the vectors of photon and matter velocities add in the normal manner albeit velocities measured by an observer are a function of his own Aether velocity according to the Addition of Velocities formulae.

    Inertial Reference Frames

    SR is restricted to predictions between IRFs as they are specified in the Principle of Special Relativity as an axiom of the theory as well as in the Lorenz Transforms. IRFs are co-ordinate frames of three distance dimensions and one time dimension which are neither accelerating nor rotating. The distance dimensions stretch to infinity.

    SR velocity effects relate to the dimensions of an IRF as observed from a different IRF. The dimensions of any matter inhabiting that IRF, i.e. stationary with respect to that IRF, are necessarily determined by the dimensions of the IRF itself.

    It follows that accelerating matter cannot inhabit an IRF and therefore cannot be subject to the predictions of the SR. As all matter is accelerating to one degree or another it also follows that matter can never inhabit an IRF according to the requirements of SR and hence SR is not applicable to matter.


    In order to overcome the above argument accelerating matter is deemed by the proponents of SR to inhabit a particular IRF for the infinitely short time dt before it moves into the next IRF. However the range of action within an IRF is limited to cdt which tends to zero distance. Thus an accelerating particle cannot observe or act upon any other particle beyond zero distance. Thus velocity effects should not be observed on the predictions of SR if either the observer or the observed object is accelerating.

    In the ATVE velocity effects are a function of velocity through the immediate Aether around and within the matter body at zero distance. Furthermore IRFs are not axioms of the ATVE. They merely act as a convenient datum. SR loses the many Aether based explanations of phenomena.

    SR does not have alternatives or has inferior explanations for the following examples:-
  3. Space volume
  4. Space distance
  5. Time
  6. Inertia
  7. The support of electric, magnetic and gravitational potentials in Space.
  8. The source of the determination of the propagation velocity, the speed of light.
  9. Action at a distance by accelerating fields.
  10. The operation of Gravity
  11. Cosmic expansion
  12. Cosmic acceleration (Dark Energy)

    The Paradoxes of SR

    It is impossible to know whether the SR predictions are real effects, ie whether they occur in an object irrespective of the presence of any other object, or whether they are observational effects which occur as the result of the observers situation, or indeed any combination of the two. As relative velocity is the same for either object A and B of the other it follows that A will see velocity effects of B equal to those which B sees of A. This equal reciprocal observation of SR leads to each of two identical clocks in different IRFs reading each other to be running relatively slow (the Dingle Paradox). If SR velocity effects are real this is impossible. However if SR velocity effects are totally observational then it would not be possible to observe real time dif13 ferences at the second meeting of two identical having taken different length journeys from their first meeting at which they were zeroed. In fact real time differences are indeed observed. Also SR cannot provide an explanation as to how one clock observes the other to have run fast for SR can only predict that observed clocks run relatively slow.


    In practice the predictions of the ATVE are identical to those of SR. Furthermore practitioners of SR do not concern themselves with applying the theory to accelerating bodies which are really the preserve of the ATVE. The major effect of the ATVE is to demonstrate that a workable velocity effects theory can be constructed from the hypothesis of the Aether. Consequently the Aether hypothesis of Space can once more become an acceptable explanation.


    • [1] G. F. Fitzgerald,(1889), The Aether and the Earths Atmosphere, Science 13, 390.
    • [2] A. A. Michelson and E. W. Morley (1887), On the Relative motion of the Earth and the Luminiferous Ether, American Journal of Science 34, 333-345.
    • [3] H. A. Lorentz, De relatieve beweging von der aarde an der Aether, Koninklijke Akadamie van Wetenschappe te Amsterdam. Wis- en Natuurkundige Afdeeling. Verslagen der Zittingen, 1 (1892-93) 74 -79.
    • [4] J S Bell (1976). How to teach special relativity, Progress in Scientific Culture 1
    • [5] R. J. Kennedy and E.M.Thorndike (1932),Experimental Establishment of the Relativity of Time, Phys. Rev.42, 400-418.
    • [6] A, Einstein (1905), Elektrodynamik bewegter Koerper, Annalen der Physik 17, 891-921.


    By: R.F. Norgan (June 2004)


    The Aether Theory of Gravity (ATG) is based upon Space being a substantial Aether which determines the local speed of light at all points, together with certain elements of the General Theory of Relativity (GTR). The ATG is a scalar theory where the gravitational potential is the difference between the speed of light at an infinite distance from matter and the local speed of light. The acceleration of light in a gravitational field is shown to be caused by refraction due to the local gradient of the speed of light. The theory predicts the bending of a transverse light ray, the non-Euclidean nature of Space, the gravitational red-shift and the precession of the perihelion of Mercury, all in agreement with observations.

    The GTR, a competing theory, is based upon the Einstein (or Strong) Equivalence Principle (EEP) which is demonstrated to be false. The GTR is also implausible as it requires one geometry of Space-Time to explain the paths of photons and a second geometry to explain the paths of matter. The GTR also possesses the weakness that although it predicts the paths of light and matter it fails to explain how these particles are constrained to follow these paths.

    The ATG requires a hypothesis for the construction of fundamental mass particles.


    Although based upon the unsound hypothesis of Space-Time which in turn rested upon the false principle, the EEP (examined later), the GTR predicted that Space was non-Euclidean in that the Space units of distance and time were not constants. However the GTR predictions incorrectly predict a variation in these units over direction. The ATG postulates the following equations which are independent of direction.

    dr = d r 1 − 2m r (1) and tr = t ,r 1 − 2m r

    tr is the time to propagate e/m potentials across a Space distance unit dr. d and t are the physical units of distance and time inherent in the Aether but at an infinite distance from matter (r = ∞). dr and tr are the local units of distance and time at distance r (the co-ordinate distance) from the centre of a gravitating body.

    The factor m is the gravitational radius of the body and equals GM/c2 . The co-ordinate distance unit is a theoretical distance unit equal to d but applied everywhere.

    As the local speed of light cr is given by dr/tr it follows that cr = dr/tr = d/t 1 − 2m r ∴ cr = c 1 − 2m r

    Consequently the speed of light is not a constant although the local speed of light cr will everywhere equal 2.998 × 108m/s in terms of local units of distance and time. Equations 1, 2 and 3 demonstrate that Space is nonEuclidean in nature. A NOTE ON VARIOUS DISTANCE UNITS Some possible distance units are:

    1. Co-ordinate distance
    2. Space distance
    3. Photon or radar distance
    4. Mass distance
    5. Effective radius distance
    6. The Co-ordinate distance unit d equals the Space distance dr at r = ∞. It is a theoretical distance applicable everywhere in Space. However it may be the natural distance unit of a sub-Aether.
    7. The Space distance unit dr is the natural distance unit of the Aether. It varies in size relative to the co-ordinate distance d according to eqn. 1.
    8. The Photon or Radar distance is distance experienced by a photon (or indeed by matter). If between the two meetings of two photons one photon covers a known distance then the other photon is deemed to have covered the same distance. In practice an e/m pulse is emitted from one object and reflected back from a second object an unknown distance away. The interval between emission and return is timed and multiplied by the speed of light to give the unknown distance. 2
    9. Mass distance is determined either directly or indirectly according to an arbitrary length of matter used as a standard unit. Mass distance varies as a function of its Aether velocity according to the Aether Theory of Velocity Effects.
    10. The Effective Radius distance is the circumference of a circle (ie orbit) centred on a gravitating body and divided by 2π . It is not equal to measurements made in either of the previous four distance units


    The radial distance r from a point in Space to the centre of a gravitating body might be measured in local distance units where dr = d q 1 − 2m r .

    . However as the centre is approached the distance r diminishes and the local distance unit grows smaller. At distance 2m from the centre the local distance unit becomes zero and it is not possible to approach the centre any closer except by taking an infinite time to do so. .

    The same problem occurs if the distance is measured by the radar method. If the radar pulse is not previously obstructed by matter and reaches the point where r = 2m it will never return to the sender who will conclude that the distance to the centre is infinite. This is an extreme case which only occurs with Black Holes.

    If the radius of the gravitating body exceeds 2m (the radius of the Sun is approx. 470, 000m ) the radar pulse will return but will always measure a greater distance to the centre (the radius of the body must be added) than the Effective radius distance. These facts determines that Space is non-Euclidean in nature.


    From eqn.2 tr = t .q 1 − 2m r .

    . Hence time runs slower compared to the observers time when r is less than that of the observer, and vice versa. An atom on the surface of the Sun emitting a photon of light is a time unit generator where the time unit, the time of one wavelength of the emitted photon, is λ/c. However this time unit is determined in local time units at r = 700, 000km (the radius of the Sun). When observed on Earth (r = 150×106km) and measured in terms of local Earth time unit’s the pulse width and hence the wavelength appears dilated. The distance and journey time for a photon to travel from the Sun to Earth is a constant for all parts of the e/m waves and consequently the journey time does not additionally affect the wavelength. This time dilation effect is called the gravitational red-shift. .

    An identical result comes from a consideration of the total energy of the photon. The energy lost by the photon of original frequency f in escaping the Sun’s gravitational field is Ω times the ’mass’ of the photon ie. Ωhf/c2 where Ω is the gravitational potential. As the energy hf equals hc/λ , the wavelength of the photon when measured by an observer at infinity (Earth is close enough to infinity) is (1 + Ω/c2 ) or 1 + m rS , where rS is the radius of the Sun. An expansion of 1.q 1 − 2m r gives 1 + m r when r ≫ m.


    A light ray is observed to bend towards the Sun as it passes through Space close to the surface of the Sun and hence across the gravitational gradient of the Sun. This was first observed by Eddington et al in 1919.

    The bending of a light ray is of common and general occurrence on Earth. This phenomenum is refraction and is caused by one side of a photon travelling for some time at a slower velocity than the opposite side. The effect is to bend the path of the photon towards the region of the slower speed of light. On Earth, substances which exhibit a slower speed of light than that of Space are glass, water and air where increasing density causes a slower speed. The speed of light gradient may be intense, as at the surface of glass or water, or it may be more gradual as in the decreasing density of the Earths atmosphere with height.

    A differentiation of eqn. 3 gives the gradient of the speed of light in Space as gradient cr = δc/δr = 2mc/r2

    In equal times δt, (FIG 1) one side of the photon, A moves distance S where xsinθ x A B S θ δθ δ S δ δ c r r


    FIG 1 as the opposite side B, distance x from A, moves a lesser distance S −δS, as a result of the slower speed of light at B.

Now δθ = δS/x = δc δrx sin θδt/x = δc δr sin θδt ∴ δθ/δt = δc δr sin θ Or δθ = δc δr sin θ c δd . (5) As acceleration equals vdθ/dt generally, then the acceleration of the light ray in a direction at right angles to its path is given by acc = c sin θδc/δr . The acceleration down the speed of light gradient is given by accr = c sin2 θδc/δr .

So a speed of light gradient causes the acceleration of a light ray crossing the gradient, down the gradient, which is the classical expectation for the gravitational effect upon matter.

The degree of acceleration is a function of the angle θ which the ray makes with the gradient. Maximum acceleration occurs at 90◦ . When the ray moves in line with the gradient (θ = 0) it actually decelerates moving down the gradient and vice versa.

Substituting eqn. 4 into eqn. 6 with θ = 90◦ gives accr = 2mc2 /r2 = 2GM/r2 . (8) Therefore light accelerates at twice the rate of matter at the same point in Space.



The GTR is based upon the truth of the Strong Equivalence Principle (SEP). The SEP states that:-

The results of all local experiments in a frame in free fall are independent of their motion and The results are the same for all such frames at all places and times.

The SEP can readily be demonstrated to be false by carrying out the following experiment in a frame in free fall; A light ray is ’dropped’ within the frame and its acceleration measured relative to the falling frame. As the acceleration of light accL is twice that of matter accM and the frame is falling at accM then the relative acceleration of the light ray to the frame is 2accM − accM = accM. Hence the result of the experiment is not only dependent on the motion of the frame, it actually measures the acceleration of the frame ie. the strength of the external gravitational field. Consequently the SEP is false. There are great practical difficulties in carrying out this experiment but they are of no matter as the experiment is a theoretical one. The practical problem lies in confining the light ray to the falling frame for long enough to be able to measure the acceleration. This could be arranged with two perfect reflecting mirrors exactly facing each other so as to confine the light ray between the mirrors. The acceleration of the ray is measured along a plane parallel to the mirror surfaces.

In order to also determine the ’artificial’ acceleration of the frame, ie. that generated by electric or magnetic fields, generally applied by contact with atoms, it is an improvement to drop a mass object as well as a light ray. accM is then the relative acceleration of the mass object to the frame which then gives a direct measure of the ’atomic’or ’artificial’ acceleration. The GTR is based upon the equivalence of artificial and gravitational accelerations. In other words all acceleration is relative. The above experiments show this postulate to be untrue.


Appendix A demonstrates that the refraction effect of Space bends a light ray from a distant star which passes close to the surface of the Sun on its way to an observer on Earth by exactly the amount observed by Eddington and many others since, in more accurate experiments.

Appendix B demonstrates the additional photon or radar distance between two points when the gravitational field of a massive body is inserted in between. In this case the massive body is the Sun, one point is the Earth and the second point is another planet on the far side of the Sun. Appendix C demonstrates the precession of an orbit (in particular of Mercury) due to the effects of equations 1 and 3. All the predictions of the ATG agree with the observations.


when the acceleration is at right angles to the path of the ray we have LIGHT RAY δθ δ d δ x x FIG A2 From fig A2 if δx ≪ δd then δθ = δx/δd. An acceleration in the x direction is given by δx/δt2 . Also δt = δd/c therefore δθ = accxδd/c . From fig A1 accX = accRRS/R ∴ δθ = accR RS Rc2 δd . (A1) According to the inverse square law accR = accRS R2 S R2 ∴ δθ = accRS R3 S R3c 2 δd . 7 From fig A1 θ = accRSR3 S c 2 Z 0 ∞ δd (R2 S + d 2 ) 3/2 ∴ θ = accRSR3 S c 2 " d R2 S (R2 S + d 2 ) 1/2 #0 ∞ ∴ θ = accRSR3 S c 2  − 1 R2 S  = accRS RS c 2 . From eqn. 8 for accr θ = 2m RS .

As m = 1.47km and Rs = 697 × 103km then θ = 0.88 arc secs. The total deflection from infinity to infinity is twice the above at 1.76 arc secs. As neither the star or the Earth are at infinity the deflection calculates to be 1.75 arc secs which is the amount observed.


The distance from Earth to an object (planet or space-craft) on the opposite side of the Sun is measured by the radar method, first with the Sun close to the radar path and then distant from the path. The difference is predicted and then compared with measurement. EARTH SUN d R RS θ B REFLECTOR dB dE S E FIG 1B The radar signal just grazes the Sun such that at point S, R = Rs. The local speed of light cR = c

1 − 2m R  where R = p R2 s + d 2 ∴ δd/c =

1 − 2m p R2 s + d 2 ! δt . (1B) Hence δd/c =   1 − 2m c 2 R2 s c 2 + t 2 1/2 δt ∴ tS = t − 2m c ln t + q t 2 + R2 s c 2 Rs/c 0 T

tS is the time for a light ray to cover the distance dE or dB with the sun present while t is the time when the sun is absent. T is the time for a light ray to pass from S to either point B or E. In the case of the Earth (E), T = 500µS.

The factor RS/c = 2.32s. ∴ tS = t − 2m c ln 1 − ln 1000 2.32 . (2B) The factor 2m/c = 9.8µs Hence tS − t = 59.5µS If the reflector B is the same distance from the Sun as the Earth then the round trip difference is 4 (ts − t) = 238µS. Therefore the distance measurement through Space from Earth to the reflector has increased by 35.7 km, caused by the gravitational field of the Sun. The predicted extra distance agrees accurately with several observations made from Earth to Venus by Shapiro et al, 1972 thus once more confirming that GL = 2GM and the acceleration of light obeys the inverse square law. 10


The orbit of Mercury is more elliptical than any of the other planets of the solar system (except for the distant planet Pluto). It has been noted by astronomers that the perihelion of Mercury’s orbit advances a little each orbit, ie. it precesses. Calculations using Newtonian mechanics predict a precession of 532 arc secs per century as a result of the effect of the other planets, notably Jupiter. However the observed precession is 43 arc secs greater than can be explained by this means. The cause of this particular precession is an inherent effect of the gravitational field described by equations 1 to 3. The precession effect occurs in all orbits whether circular or elliptical but naturally the precession cannot be detected in a circular or near-circular orbit. The degree of angular precession increases in inverse proportion to the radius of the orbit hence Mercury exhibit’s the largest effect of all the planets as well as possessing the necessary elliplicity to allow its detection. The precession effect is most simply explained with a circular orbit where V 2 r Rr

mc2 r 2 . (C1) The right hand side of eqn. 1 is the gravitational force and the left hand side effectively describes the acceleration of Mercury towards the Sun in terms of the rate of bending of its path in order to describe an orbit of radius Rr. Rr and r are normally considered to be identical but in this case they are not. Rr is the effective radius, ie. the orbit length divided by 2π , but in distance units relevant to radius r. vr can equally be given in terms of a fraction A of the speed of light cr. m is the gravitating radius of the Sun and is 1.47km. From eqns. 1 and 3 and the discussion above we have A2 c 2

1 − 2m r 2 r q 1 − 2m r

mc2 r 2 So A2

1 − 2m r 3/2 r

m r 2 . When r is large relative to m which is the case in the solar system we have A2

1 − 3m r  r

m r 2 . (C2) Therefore the effective radius of the orbit is r 1 − 3m r  or r

1 + 3m r 

The orbit length therefore exceeds the nominal orbit length of 2πr by 6πm or 27.7km in the solar system irrespective of orbit radius however large or small (not for r < approx 4m). In angular terms this is 6πm/r radians. For Mercury, r is 58 × 106 km hence the precession is 0.0985 arc secs /orbit or 41 arc secs per century. This accounts for the anomaly within the limit of observational accuracy. Most explanations of this phenomenum are exceedingly and unnecessarily more complex than the above explanation. When r = 3m the orbit length will be infinitely longer than the nominal orbit of 2π . Hence r = 3m is a limiting radius for orbits. 12 THE ACTION OF A GRAVITATIONAL FIELD ON MATTER Equations 1 and 2 explain the behaviour of light in a gravitational field through the effect of refraction but they do not explain the behaviour of matter. The competing theory, the GTR, explains the paths taken by light and matter through a gravitational field as geodesics moving through curved Space-time. The metric equation giving the geometry of Space-time (for a two dimensional plane only) is ds2 = r − 2m r dt2 − r r − 2m dr2 − r 2 dθ2 .

The geometry of Space-time described in eqn. 8 applies to matter but for light a different geometry is used where dS = 0. In other words the GTR states that there is one Space-Time for matter and a different Space–Time for light. It is highly implausible that the geometry of Space-Time could modify itself according to which type of particle is moving through at a particular time.

A scalar field of the local speed of light cr perfectly accounts for the known gravitational phenomena of light and so it is reasonable to expect it to also account for the gravitational effects observed of matter. The difference in the two effects can only then be accounted for by the differing construction of photons and fundamental matter particles and their different re-actions to the gravitational field.

As the construction of a fundamental mass particle is not known the ATG cannot be a complete theory. However a theory which requires a hypothesis which may be correct is surely preferable to a theory which is definitely incorrect.


The predictions of the GTR for the paths of light and matter through Space agree with the predictions of the ATG except in the vicinity of a Black Hole. However the GTR has no explanation as to how objects are constrained to follow these predicted paths. This requirement is a philosophical question which needs much consideration for Mach’s explanation is untenable.

On the other hand the ATG proposes that Space is a substantial Aether and all objects in Space are in contact with and indeed are effects of their local Aether. Thus the path of photons and matter particles are determined precisely by the local Aether which causes the original path of these particles to be continued but with a modification resulting from the local gradients of the speed of light and electro-magnetic potentials.


The detailed construction of fundamental matter particles is not known and may never be known. This section merely describes possible constructions based upon certain known facts.


Under suitable conditions matter can transform into energy ie. Photons and vice versa, according to the equation E = mc2 . Instead of the e/m waves of a photon converting into an entirely different substance called matter it is more likely that the e/m waves merely take on a different geometry.


Electric and magnetic fields exhibit the phenomena that we consider particular to matter ie. inertia and kinetic energy. For example the energy within a unit volume electric field is kE2/8π and in a magnetic field µH2/8π. There is therefore no need for a special matter substance to exhibit these parameters. F


The upper limit of matter velocity is precisely the velocity of electro-magnetic waves. How is it that a special matter substance be limited by the velocity of a completely different substance, photons, unless matter and photons were both constructed of electro-magnetic waves. This paper therefore postulates that fundamental matter units are constructed of electro-magnetic waves moving in a three dimensional vortex of minute dimensions.


It follows from the effect of a gravitational field upon a photon that the path of the e/m waves in a vortex will also be bent, depending on their angle of incidence to the speed of light gradient. An e/m vortex stationery in the Aether must be symmetrical in all directions. It is therefore assumed that the vortex can be broken down into a set of two dimensional circular paths where the plane of the circular path takes all angles over time, to any particular direction in Space. The more simple action of a speed of light gradient upon an e/m circular path can then be considered. When the plane of the e/m ring is at 90◦ to the speed of light gradient the 14 e/m wave path will be bent continuously in a direction down the gradient according to eqn. 5. The e/m ring as an entity will accelerate down the speed of light gradient. On the other hand, an e/m ring whose plan is at 0◦ to the speed of light gradient will be affected differently. Any bending caused when the e/m waves move with a component at 90 to the gradient will be lost when the waves move parallel to the gradient. Hence although the e/m ring is slightly distorted the distortion does not build up over time and no acceleration is generated. In practice the e/m rings exist at all angles to the speed of light gradient but when broken down into components, the component at 90◦ to the gradient must be equally as common as the component at 0◦ to the gradient. Hence for one half the time the vortex is subject to an acceleration down the gradient and for the other half it is not. This may explain why light accelerates at twice the rate of matter.


It is known that the exposure of matter to a gravitational field causes an acceleration of that matter. In other words, after an exposure of a finite time the material object is given a certain velocity in the direction of the field in addition to any velocity possessed prior to the time period. If the gravitational field could be theoretically switched off at the end of the period the induced velocity would continue for ever.

From the previous consideration of the possible structure of the vortex and the accelerating effect of a speed of light gradient upon the e/m rings it would appear that the gradient causes a distortion of the geometry of the vortex which then causes the vortex to ’screw’ a path through the Aether at a velocity which is a function of the degree of screw times the speed of light. The degree of screw is permanent, (one aspect of inertia), until changed by a further exposure to an accelerating field.

From this postulate of the construction of matter it follows that Matter velocity (relative to the Aether) is a result of the geometry of matter particles both in the degree and direction of the screw Matter velocity is determined by the degree of screw distortion times the speed of light. Hence matter velocity is a given fraction of the local speed of light. The maximum degree of screw approaches unity where the velocity of matter approaches the velocity of its constituent part, e/m waves, the speed of light.

As kinetic energy and hence mass (E = mc2 ) is a function of particle velocity which in turn is a function of the degree of screw distortion, it follows that particle mass is determined by the particle geometry. 15


This section is outside the scope of this paper but nevertheless is an obvious extension.

An electric field is a field of the gradient of electric potential and a magnetic field is a field of the gradient of magnetic potential. A fundamental matter particle, ie. an e/m vortex, situated in an electric or magnetic field superimposes its internal e/m potentials on the e/m potential gradients of the local field. These gradients unbalance the internal potentials in a similar manner to a speed of light gradient as previously described. The effect is likely to be a similar one in which a degree of ’screw’ deformation is produced in the e/m vortex. Consequently electric and magnetic potential gradients also cause accelerations in matter. However they can not accelerate uncharged matter. Consequently fundamental matter particles must be charged positive or negative with uncharged particles non fundamental, being a combination of various charged particles.

When subject to an ambient electro-magnetic gradient the charged constituents within an uncharged particle move until the ambient gradient is cancelled by the field gradients of the other constituent particles.


The path of a matter particle through Space with a zero speed of light gradient lies in a direction determined by the direction of the screw geometry of the particle. The e/m waves, the constituents of the particle, are super-imposed upon the local Aether and maintain the direction through the Aether. Where a speed of light gradient exists the effect is to cause an acceleration of the particle down the gradient which then modifies the geometry of the particle to a changed direction and degree. The degree of screw distortion of the geometry of the particle is a fractional factor which operates on the local speed of light to generate the local velocity of the matter particle. 16


By R.F. Norgan (20/12/1999)

The wavelength of the light that we receive on Earth from distant galaxies is shifted towards the red end of the visible spectrum. This phenomenom is called redshift (Z). It means that the wavelength of the emitted radiation has increased between emission from the galaxy and reception here on Earth many light years later. The obvious explanation for redshift is a Doppler Effect which states that the wavelength of any emission is modified by the relative velocity (strictly speaking, the change in distance) between source and receiver. If the distance between the source and receiver is increasing then the wavelength increases and vice-versa. It therefore appears that the distant galaxies are receding from Earth. When the relative velocity between source and receiver v is very much less than the transmission velocity, the speed of light c, the Doppler equation can be written in a simple form. Z = λ0 − λe λe

v c . In the unusual case where a nearby galaxy is found to give a negative redshift ie. a blue shift, the relative velocity is negative and the galaxy is approaching Earth.


In 1929 Edwin Hubble came to an important conclusion based upon the measured redshift of many galaxies. He found that the further away the galaxy the greater the redshift and hence the greater the recession velocity. The relationship is described by the following equation : cZ = H0d

Where H0 is the value of Hubbles constant H at the present time (assuming that H is a function of time). The value of H0 has not yet been accurately determined but is approximately 75km/s per mega-parsec (one parsec is 3.26 light years).

Naturally cosmologists sought an explanation for this general expansion of the universe. George Gamow and others suggested that the expansion started from a single point in Space and time several billions of years ago. Prior to that event neither matter, energy, distance or time existed but that at the event the entire matter and energy of today’s universe was created in an instant. From that single point of zero dimensions the universe has continued to expand and develop. Gamow’s hypothesis is commonly known as the Big Bang explanation, or BB theory for short. However the name Big Bang does not give an accurate picture of Gamow’s hypothesis. In his description there is no bang as such for there never was a high central pressure in the universe to accelerate matter through Space. Instead, the expansion is one of Space itself, with matter and energy embedded in it.

According to the theory all points in Space remain the same relative distances apart. What changes is a universal scale factor R, which is continuously increasing. This scale factor modifies the value of all distance. For example, if in a certain time the scale factor increases by say 10% then the distance between any and every two points in Space, whether one micron apart or one billion light years apart, will increase by 10%. The longer the distance the greater the absolute increment hence the greater the separation velocity between the two points. Hence Gamow’s hypothesis seemed to fit Hubbles observations.


However there are several obvious problems with the BB theory. For instance, how could the entire matter/energy of the universe be created from nothing. Also, how could time and distance be created and should not these dimensions always exist. Furthermore, what exists beyond the boundary of the expanding universe and so exactly what does the universe expand into. All these questions are unanswerable and refer to seemingly impossible processes and circumstances pointing to the invalidity of the BB theory. However it must be realised that these or similar difficult questions can be asked of any theory of the creation of the universe. For example, an alternative hypothesis of a universe of infinite age and dimensions has no start event or boundary problem but infinite time and infinite distance with no boundaries are equally impossible to imagine. Consequently this type of criticism is not specific to the BB theory.

Nevertheless there are numerous criticisms of the BB theory which are specific to that theory alone. For example immediately after the point of creation but prior to any expansion, the distance dimensions of the universe would necessarily be zero. Assuming that the energy created was in the form of e/m waves these waves must be of a certain finite length, however short. And yet, at point zero, length did not exist and so energy could not exist. If, alternatively, the universe was created over a finite volume possessing distance dimensions at the very start, then how could the mass/energy creation event occur simultaneously at all points of a finite volume. A means of synchronisation at an infinite velocity would have been required but we have no knowledge of a possible mechanism to achieve that end.

A further difficulty lies in the essence of expansion. What exactly is the substance of Space that it possesses the ability to expand for it is not logical that ’nothing’ can expand, for a multiple of nothing is still nothing. The BB theory does not give any description of or give substance to Space, the expansion of which is the very basis of the BB theory.


Accepting without further question that Space does expand, consider now the explanation given by the BB theory of the mechanism that controls and determines the rate of expansion. Although the BB theory accepts that the observed expansion is one of Space, nevertheless it maintains that the expansion is determined by the kinetic energy of matter embedded in Space, notwithstanding that in the early stages of the universe matter did not yet exist. If matter is merely passively embedded in an expanding Space why then should it have any effect upon the mechanism of expansion. It appears that this explanation of the BB theory stems partly from the Space Expansion Theory and partly from a traditional big bang where matter is forcibly accelerated through Space by a central excess of pressure. Hence the BB theory combines aspects of two entirely different mechanisms in its explanation of cosmic expansion.


The above explanation of cosmic expansion is embodied in the famous Friedmann equation which is at the heart of the BB theory. Friedmann accepts that the expansion velocity is determined by the inertia of matter, ie. the expansion velocity is kinetic in nature. This is clear from the fact that in his model the expansion velocity is modified by the deceleration caused by a universal gravitational field as well as his assumption that cosmic expansion velocity creates kinetic energy. He gives the total energy of the universe as: TOTAL ENERGY = KINETIC ENERGY + POTENTIAL GRAVITATIONAL ENERGY

Friedmann’s universal gravitational field decelerates the expanding matter towards a central point and depending upon the matter density of the universe gravity will or will not eventually overcome the current kinetic energy. If not, then the universe will expand for ever but if overcome then the outward velocity of matter will reverse until all matter will eventually meet back at the central point in an event termed the Big Crunch. (the proponents of the BB theory deny the existence of a central point but if one does not exist then in which direction does a universal gravitational field operate).

It is difficult to understand how Friedmann’s centrally directing universal gravitation field can exist, for a universe which is accepted to be both isotropic and homogenous cannot by definition exhibit a gravitational potential difference on a large scale. The Friedmann equation is absolutely central to the BB theory for it generates predictions for both the age and the size of the universe as well as the rate of cosmic expansion. Furthermore it predicts the proper distance to distant galaxies according to their redshift.

Hence dp = 2HL 1 − √ 1 1+Z

Where HL = c/H0 and is called the Hubble length. It can be seen that proper distance is not a linear function of redshift which is surely rather strange.


If H0 is taken to be 50km/s per mega parsec then according to BB theory the radius of the universe is 39 × 109 light years and its age is 13 × 109 years.

Consequently the average expansion velocity of galaxies at the ’edge’ of the universe is three times the speed of light. The further back one goes in time the more rapid is the expansion. For example, when the universe was only 1 light year old the rate of expansion was 4700 times the speed of light and at an age of one second it was 740, 000 c. During the period of ’inflation’, an attempt to overcome a serious flaw in the BB theory, the rate of expansion was an astonishing 3 × 1041 times the speed of light.

It is obvious from these extreme velocities that they cannot be trans-Aether velocities limited to the speed of light and so it follows that neither can they be kinetic velocities which cause kinetic energy. If cosmic expansion velocities are not kinetic then the Friedmann equation is wrong and it follows that the BB theory which predicts these fantasy velocities must also be wrong.


The Postulates

All Space is occupied by a substance, the Aether, which supports electric and magnetic potentials and determines their velocity of propagation. The Aether increases in volume at a rate which is constant over position and time.

The first postulate is the general postulate of a universal Aether. The second postulate determines cosmic expansion. Both postulates are independent of the existence of matter and energy.


The rate of increase of volume as described by postulate 2 is given by the constant HV in units of a fractional part per year. An expansion of volume naturally causes an increase in linear distance between points in Space at a rate of HL where HL = HV /3.(HV is very small).

A point in the Aether is considered to be a physical body of unit volume rather than of zero volume, thus the Aether consists of countless minute unit volumes (termed Aethons). Points in Space can not be directly detected or accessed by material objects.

Postulate 2 describes a geometric expansion of Space with time constants of 1/HV and 1/HL for volume and distance respectively. The parameters of proper distance s, velocity v and acceleration a, are given by the following equations. (Proper distance is a theoretical tape measure type of distance measured between two points instantly).

s = s0e tHL (1) v = ds dt = s0HLe tHL (2) acc = d 2 s dt2 = s0H 2 L e tHL (3) At the present time s = s0 V0 = s0HL (4) acc0 = s0H 2 L (5)

Eqn. 4 describes the velocity of cosmic expansion where V0 equals cZ (it can be seen later on that this is true for all values of Z). In the Aether Theory of Cosmic Expansion (ATCE) HL is constant over time and place such that the value of Hubbles constant as measured today (H0) equals HL.


The two postulates together require that cosmic expansion velocity and transAether velocity are two entirely different forms of velocity. The velocity of matter (sub-luminal velocity) and energy (at the speed of light) are characterised by movement ’through’ the Aether and relative to the Aether. These velocities are kinetic velocities which determine the kinetic energy content of a particle, 1 2mv2 for matter and hc/λ for photons.

On the other hand, cosmic expansion velocity is almost a theoretical velocity and is merely a shorthand way to describe the rate of creation of distance between two points in Space over time. It should be realised that trans-Aether or kinetic velocity is an entirely separate parameter to cosmic expansion velocity. All the laws of physics which are functions of velocity such as the law of kinetic energy and the Aether Theory of Velocity Effects (ATVE) (or STR for those who choose Einsteins theory) are functions of trans-Aether velocity rather than cosmic expansion velocity.

A confusion between the two velocities can occur as they both create an e/m wave-length shift. This is simply because both cosmic expansion and a receding trans-Aether velocity, whether of source or observer or both, create additional Space between the emitter of a photon (a star) and the observer of that photon ie during the passage of that photon.

Hence the famous Friedmann equation which is at the centre of BB theory is fundamentally at fault for considering kinetic energy to be a function of cosmic expansion velocity. Also, as the theory of velocity effects (ATVE) is not a function of cosmic expansion velocity, that velocity is not upper limited to the speed of light which is the case for trans-Aether velocities. Therefore cosmic expansion velocities can exceed the speed of light to any degree. The highest cosmic expansion velocity measured to date is 5.6c.


Consider the light received on Earth from a star in a distant galaxy. As we are concerned here with the effects of cosmic expansion the effects of transAether velocities will be ignored. During the lifetime of the emitted photons their wavelength will be subject to the effects of cosmic expansion such that the wavelength is a distance affected by eqn. 1 thus λ0 = λee tHL

Where t is the lifetime of the photon and λ0 and λe are the wavelengths of the photon at observation (the end of period t) and emission (the beginning of period t) respectively. The duration t is given by sLP /c where sLP is the length of the path of the photon.

The redshift is given by Z = λ0 − λe λe = e SLP HL/c − 1 . (7)

As each photon moves towards Earth through Space both the Space distance behind it to the galaxy and the Space distance in front to Earth are expanding according to eqn.1. Each segment of distance δs behind the photon has expanded as a function of the time since the photon passed that segment. The sum of all these segments when the photon strikes Earth is the proper distance sP between Earth and the galaxy.

Therefore SP = c Z T 0 e tHL dt = c HL e tHL SLp/c 0 ∴ SP = c HL e SLpHL/c − 1 6

Therefore substituting from eqn. 7 SP = cZ/HL . And from eqn. 4 v = cZ HL × HL = cZ .

Equation 8 is Hubbles equation and equation 9 is a derived form of Hubbles equation. In BB theory neither equation is linear with Z with considerable variation for high values of Z where-as eqns. 8 and 9 above are always linear irrespective of the value of Z.

Because the relative magnitude of a star is a function of its proper distance SP equation 8 gives a linear relationship between relative magnitude and log redshift. However two effects separate to cosmic expansion diminish light intensity at high redshifts. The first effect is due to the loss of energy of each photon directly due to the redshift (E = he/λ) and the second effect arises from the cosmic expansion velocity as less photons are received per second than are transmitted. The combined effect is to diminish the light flux received and hence increase the observed magnitude by the factor 5 log (1 + Z).


Cosmologists measure the distance to a galaxy or star by various means. They also measure the redshift Z. From eqn. 9, which is equally true for cosmic expansion velocity as it is for trans-Aether velocity (The Doppler equation is identical to eqn. 9 for low velocities) they determine the total recession or radial velocity. Where the recession velocity deviates from that predicted from Hubbles Law (eqn. 8) the difference is considered to be the radial component of the trans-Aether velocity or ’peculiar’ velocity, as it is termed by cosmologists. The direction of the trans-Aether velocity is random relative to the direction to Earth and hence there is also a transverse component of the peculiar velocity which naturally does not contribute to observed redshift. Peculiar or trans-Aether velocities are generally less than 1000 km/s (3.3 × 10−3 c) and so do not seriously modify redshifts in excess of Z = 0.03.

After the removal of the random trans-Aether velocity component the remaining velocity is the Hubble Flow velocity and it can be seen that this is the Cosmic expansion velocity given by eqn. 4. There is as yet no universal agreement for the value of H. However it is expected to be within 50 − 100 km/s per mega-parsec. In future discussion I use the mid point value of 75 km/s per mega parsec. H0 = HL = 75km/s per mega parsec = 23km/s per mega light year = 3 × 105 km/s per 13 × 109 light years = 1 part in 13 billion per year ∴ HV = 3HL = 1 part in 4.3 billion per year


According to the postulates a given volume of Space doubles every 3 × 109 years. If the volume of the universe is infinite then accordingly it will remain infinite for any time in the future or the past. If however the universe is finite then its volume will double every 3 × 109 years forward in time and halve for the same period backwards in time. Consequently the volume of the universe was never zero back in time under either scenario. Therefore according to this theory (ATCE) the universe did not have a starting point and is infinitely old. At the current date redshifts have been observed in excess of 5 eg. Z = 5.6. From eqn. 8 this implies a universe of radius at least 72.8 × 109 light years (assuming that the observed redshift is entirely due to cosmic expansion). The ATCE is a theory about Space (the Aether) and is not concerned with matter or energy other than as a means of investigating Space. The following comments on matter and energy are entirely speculative.


As Space volume is continuously being created this implies a diminuation in matter density if new matter is not being created. This in turn implies that the density of matter was infinite an infinite time ago. This would appear to be an unlikely scenario. The only alternative is that matter is also being continuously created, probably at a similar rate to the creation of Space such that matter densities remain substantially constant over time. Possibly the creation of matter is somehow a by product of the creation of Space.


It is accepted that the variation in the Aether distance and time units which are the essence of a gravitational field is an entirely separate Aether effect to the second postulate of this theory.


By R.F. Norgan Oct 2004


Our human concept of time is one of a universal dimension that controls the rate of change and movement of every material object. Furthermore we expect the rate of passage of time to be constant everywhere in the universe even though we have no way of knowing whether it is or not. We also expect that a particular instant in time occurs simultaneously everywhere in the universe.


Science, in the guise of Albert Einstein disabused us of this last notion. If suddenly the Sun stopped radiating light we would not know about the event until 8.3secs later as it takes that long for light to reach Earth. In fact, we come to know of all events in the universe through their emitted light or other electro-magnetic radiation. That knowledge is delayed by the duration of transmission of the speed of light over the intervening distance. This delay may be as great as tens of billions of years. One event may be the emission of a photon by a far distant galaxy and another event the collision of that photon with Earth. The two events are separate even though one causes the other. It is possible with a knowledge of the intervening distance between the two events to calculate the separation of these events on an artificial universal time basis but this is of no practical importance compared to the fact of the two events. Universal simultaneity is a meaningless concept.


Time is manifested in an infinite variety of ways, eg through the obvious movement of material objects such as motor cars, aeroplanes, ships, clouds, birds and animals etc, but also through what humans call ’change’. Change occurs in the growth and decay of living organisms such as plants and animals. It is characterised as a very slow and often unseen movement of material deep within the body of the organism. Change also occurs in features of the landscape such as the course of rivers, the height and shape of mountains, the coastline and, even less perceptible, the drift of continents. The cause of landscape change is once again the slow and mostly hidden movement of material. The one common factor in all these examples is the movement of material, albeit at a great variety of velocities from near zero to just below the speed of light. Light itself moves at 2.998×108 m/s although we tend to think that such an extreme movement relative to our everyday observations is instantaneous. The discussion above has now simplified the action of time somewhat to the general movement of material and energy. Nevertheless such a great variety of possible velocities does not immediately point to a mechanism by which time controls these different velocities.


It is convenient for humans to separate the steady ’flow’ of time into arbitrary but constant length ’chunks’ which we call time units. The first time unit chosen was the ’day’, the time for a single rotation of the Earth. The end of the day and the beginning of the next could be readily ascertained by an astronomical observation of the stars or the Sun. Until the end of the 19th Century we knew of no time source more constant and reliable than the rotation of the Earth and the day time unit became our standard for thousands of years. A time unit of one day was rather inconvenient for human beings who practiced many different operations during the course of a day such as sleeping, eating, working etc. The day time unit was therefore subdivided into 24 parts (hours) which were then further subdivided into 60 parts (minutes) and further still into another 60 parts (seconds). In the physics laboratory the second eventually became the time unit standard as it could be generated more conveniently, and more importantly, with greater stability than the revolution of the Earth.

Instead the second was generated directly from the swing of a pendulum, the oscillation of a balance wheel , more recently from the vibration of a minute quartz tuning fork and even more accurately from the vibration of Caesium atoms. The essential requirement of all time unit generators (TUGs) is that each time unit is an exact replica of all others ie. the generator rotates or oscillates in an identical manner. This requirement provides a constancy of the time unit length over long time periods and varying ambient conditions.

Although all practical TUGs oscillate or rotate this is not an essential requirement. For example, if an object moved at a constant velocity the distance along its path could be marked out in equal distances such that each time the object passed a distance marker it would indicate the end of one time unit and the start of the next. One of the great practical disadvantages being that eventually the moving object passes beyond our limits of observation. It should be noted that arbitrary distance markers are not essential as with an object moving at a constant velocity the analogue distance moved by the object relates directly to the time passed. It will be seen that this particular point achieves a greater significance later. The other practical difficulty of such a clock lies in choosing a moving object with exactly constant velocity.


The most constant velocity possible is the movement of a light ray. This velocity is a universal constant ie. it has exactly the same value, 2.998×108m/s, at all points in Space. It is obviously not possible to construct a linear ie. non oscillating clock, using a light ray as in one second the light ray would have moved 300, 000 km away from the observer. Instead an oscillating TUG can be constructed with two perfectly reflecting mirrors exactly facing each other and separated by a matter rod of a constant but arbitrary length ’l’ . A light pulse is introduced between the two mirrors such that it reflects back and forth along the same track, in theory for ever. The boundary between time units is the reflection of the light pulse from a chosen mirror and the length of the time unit is given by 2l/c. A clock of this construction is called a Photon Clock. As real mirrors are not perfect the light pulse eventually diminishes in intensity but nevertheless the photon clock does operate in practice for some time although, perhaps, its major use is as a theoretical device in thought experiments.

The photon clock is the most perfect TUG possible as long as the matter rod length remains unaffected by changes in ambient conditions.


However there is one factor which does modify the photon clock time unit and equally affects all other forms of clock and matter systems . That factor is velocity through the Aether.

The velocity of the Earth through the Aether is believed to be 360 km/s and this velocity causes time to run slower on Earth by a factor of nearly one part in a million relative to a planet which is stationary in the Aether (see the PDF paper on Velocity Effects). The mechanism of the velocity effect upon a photon clock is extremely instructive with regard to an understanding of the nature of time.

The mechanism operates in two different ways dependent upon the orientation of the path of the internal light ray either at 0◦ or at 90◦ to the Aether velocity of the clock. Figure 1 describes the path of the light ray when the orientation is 90◦ . The light pulse initially leaves mirror 1 at Space point A Mirror 2 Mirror 1 Aether Velocity Ve A′ B′ C′ A B C l FIG 1 in order to reach mirror 2 distance l away at Space point A1

However mirror 2 has moved, due to its velocity Ve , in the time the light ray reaches it such that the point A1 on mirror 2 opposite point A has moved on to Space point B1 ( in the same time, that point of mirror 1 which was at Space-point A has also moved on to Space point B). On reflection of the ray back to mirror 1 the operation is exactly repeated and the mirror 1 point now occupies Space point C and the mirror 2 point occupies Space point C 1

The triangle AB1B shows the effect. The light ray travels side AB1 and so AB1 is proportional to the speed of light c. In the same time the mirror 3 travels side AB which is proportional to Ve. Side BB1 is exactly length l. Consequently the actual length of AB1 AB1 = lc.p c 2 − V 2 e . The time taken for light to traverse AB1 is l , c r 1 − V 2 e c 2 This factor equally applies to the return journey and hence to the whole time unit. But 2l/c is the time duration for the light pulse when Ve = 0 hence t = t0 ,r 1 − V 2 e c 2 (1) Figure 2 describes the path of the light ray when the orientation is 0◦ . The A B C A' B' C' MIRROR 1 MIRROR 2 AETHER VELOCITY→ Ve FIG 2 light pulse leaves mirror 1 at Space point A and travels to mirror 2 which, in the meantime has moved on to Space point B1 as a result of its Aether velocity Ve. The light pulse reflects from mirror 2 back to mirror 1 which again has now moved on to Space point C. It can be seen that distance AB1 is greater than AA1 (distance l) and that distance B1C is less than AA1 . The distances AB1 and B1C can be calculated by taking the velocity of the light pulse with respect to the two mirrors to be the vector addition of c the speed of light and the Aether velocity i.e, c ± Ve. Thus the total time for the light pulse to return to mirror 1 is t = l  1 c + Ve + 1 c − Ve 

2l c 1 − V 2 e c 2 = t0 1 − V 2 e c 2 (2) It can be seen that Eqn. 2 is different from eqn. 1 by the factor p 1 − V 2 e /c2 . But an additional factor, the Fitzgerald Lorentz (F-L) contraction effect 4 comes in to play when the orientation of the separating matter rod is at 0 ◦ to its Aether velocity. The F-L effect states that all matter contracts in the direction of its Aether velocity by the factor p 1 − V 2 e /c2 . Hence l = l0 p 1 − V 2 e /c2 . Eqn. 2 then becomes t = 2l0 q 1 − V 2 e c 2 c 1 − V 2 e c 2 = t0 ,r 1 − V 2 e c 2

Hence the time unit is affected equally in either orientation. As any unknown angle of orientation can always be broken down into components at 0◦ and at 90◦ and as the effect is identical for either component then the effect is identical for any angle of orientation of the photon clock. In fact the time dilation effect applies equally to all matter objects or matter systems however large or small.

The nature of time for matter systems is encapsulated by the path taken by a light ray within a photon clock.



We must assume that most matter systems are moving through the Aether at various velocities and consequently their time unit is affected by that velocity as described in the previous paragraph. But now take a photon clock which is stationary within the Aether. The orientation of a stationary clock is entirely immaterial as there is no Aether velocity against which orientation can be measured.

Also, consequent of the zero Aether velocity there is no F-L contraction effect and so the distance traversed by the light pulse over a single time unit is always 2l. Furthermore the time duration is l/c in either direction of the light pulse between the two mirrors. In fact, if instead we measure distance in Space via some theoretical means then there is no need for the photon clock (which represents a matter system) to determine a unit distance. Time relative to the Aether can be directly measured by the analogue distance travelled through the Aether by a light ray. It might even be said that a separate time dimension does not and need not exist and this would be true but for the existence of matter.


The difficulty of matter is that it does not travel at the speed of light. The non-equal velocities of photons and matter particles indicate that the time dimension mechanism of the universe which controls the different rates of these velocities must lie within a far deeper aspect of the Universe than either energy or matter. However in my paper on the Aether Theory of Gravity (ATG), I postulate that fundamental particles (FMP’s) are constructed of electro-magnetic waves, just as are photons, except that they move in a minute spherical geometry. Hence, although this e/m vortex, as an entity, may be stationary in the Aether, the electro-magnetic wave constituents of the vortex are all moving at the speed of light. Therefore at the Aether level, the electro-magnetic constituents of both matter and photons all move at one identical speed, the speed of light. It then follows that the assumption made in the previous section was correct; that there is no separate Time dimension and time instead is given by the distance moved through Space by e/m waves eg. a light ray.

But there remains the problem of exactly which distance is the analogue of time.


It is seen in my paper, the Aether Theory of Gravity, that there are several possible types of distance. The most fundamental unit of distance is co-ordinate distance r where the unit distance is determined by a sub -Aether, a more fundamental physical substance than the Aether. The variable size of Aethons, the distance unit of the Aether, is determined in distance units of the sub-Aether. Photon distance is determined not only by the Aethon distance unit dr but also by the Aethon time tr unit as the two together determine the local speed of light. cr = dr  tr = c∞ 1 − 2m r (3) Where m is the gravitating radius of a source mass and r is the distance in co-ordinate units from its centre.


As we have determined that Time is the distance moved by a light ray then that distance is naturally ’photon distance’. The photon distance may be calculated theoretically and expressed in terms of the co-ordinate distance, but it is photon distances alone which determine whether events occur or not within our world of matter and energy. If two photons, A and B, temporarily occupy the same point in Space and then at a later time occupy the same but different point in Space then it follows that the two photons must have traveled identical photon distances between these two co-incidences notwithstanding that the two paths were different and at least one path must have been bent to one degree or another. If the path of photon A was known to pass through Space where the gravitational field was weak and the path of photon B was known to pass through Space where the gravitational field was very strong then the co-ordinate distances and even the Aethon distances traveled by the two photons would be very different notwithstanding that the photon distances were equal. But 6 from the point of view of the meeting and interaction of particles and hence for the history and the future of the Universe it is photon distances that matter.


The electric and magnetic potentials residing in an Aethon are passed on to contiguous Aethons after a time delay which is a unit time interval at the level of the Aether but is a variable time at the level of the sub-Aether. As the Aethon distance unit diminishes with increasing proximity to a mass, then the Aethon time unit increases in an inverse relationship. dr = d r 1 − 2m r , tr = t ,r 1 − 2m r Hence time exists at the Aethon and sub-Aether level but it does not exist in the form of a universal time dimension.


Minkowski included Time as a fourth dimension in his geometric models of Space and it was upon this model that Einstein based his General Theory of Relativity (Gravity). As time is not a dimension it follows that Minkowski Space-Time is a false geometry of Space. The interval between two points in three dimensional Space gives the distance between these two points which is an analogue of the time that would be taken for a light ray to pass from one point to the other. By including Time as a fourth dimension, albeit with a negative sign, the interval δS is effectively and incorrectly included twice. Einstein overcomes the error in the case of the light by putting the interval δS to zero but kept δS for the case of matter. Thus, in the case of light δt stands in for the omitted δS and the omission is really one of the time dimension rather than of the interval. Consequently, Einstein employs two separate geometries in his GTR, one with a time dimension for the case of matter and one without a time dimension for the case of light. Naturally Space cannot possess two separate geometries.



First and foremost, the Aether is the substance of volume. It is the only substance which is volume as there is no separate matter substance. Volume (Space) can be separated off into quantities of volume of varying sizes by means of material or theoretical boundaries. It is therefore possible to consider in an abstract manner, different quantities of volume, e.g. 1 litre and 2 litres. If Space (volume) was nothing rather than a substance then 1 litre would necessarily be the same as 2 litres (or indeed a billion litres) as any multiple of nothing still gives nothing. As we appreciate that 1 litre is different to 2 litres volume must be a substance, the Aether. The ancient Greeks applied a certain logic to the variable quantity, gold. They deduced that gold must consist of variable numbers of identical gold units which they called atoms and which are the essence of gold. The division of a gold atom does not produce two pieces of gold but parts which are entirely different from gold. The logic of the Greeks is equally applicable to any variable quantity of a homogenous substance and so it also applies to volume. Consequently a quantity of volume must consist of a number of identical volume units to which I give the name, Aethons. Presumably the size of an Aethon is extremely small, far smaller than the smallest known volume of matter. As an Aethon cannot by definition be sub-divided it must also be the definition of a point in Space. Thus a point in Space possesses unit volume rather than zero volume as is normally determined.


As the Aether is volume it naturally determines distance in all directions, the physical unit of distance being the distance between contiguous Aethons. The distance between any two points in Space (Aethons) is determined by the position of the two chosen Aethons in the matrix of Aethons which is the Aether. An analogy might be two chosen but separated iron atoms within a block of iron. They are forever separated by a certain distance by the iron atoms in between . The separation distance in the Aether (and in iron) is not determined by any one path of contiguous Aethons joining the two chosen points but by each and every possible contiguous path, however convoluted. The Aethon hypothesis of a natural distance unit in the universe, fanciful though it might be thought to be, should be compared with the lack of available alternative explanations of distance. It is not possible for humans or indeed for material objects to detect individual Aethons hence we cannot mark points in Space. Matter ’inhabits’ Aethons only transiently as matter moves through the Aether at various ve1 locities (the Earth possesses an Aether velocity of 360 km/s).


The Hubble redshift is caused by the recession velocity of galaxies, the further the galaxy the higher the velocity. This effect is the result of the continuous creation of new Aether. For every given volume of Space a constant fractional amount is newly created over a given time period. For example, over a period of one year that fraction is one part in 4.3 billion (taking Hubbles constant to be 75km/s per mega-parsec).

An alternative view is that each Aethon possesses the probability of changing into two Aethons of 1 in 3 billion per year. This hypothesis of the Aether predicts a universe of infinite age, a scenario entirely different to that described by the Big Bang Theory of the creation of the universe.


Prior to Einstein’s denial of the existence of the Aether in his Special Theory of Relativity (STR) it was widely accepted that the electric and magnetic potentials resided on physical points of the Aether. i.e. upon Aethons,. It was also accepted that the e/m potentials propagate through the Aether at the speed of light (3 × 108m/s) determined by the substance of the Aether. This website demonstrates that Einsteins STR is faulty and hence the above hypotheses still stand.

It is expected that the propagation velocity of e/m potentials arises from the unit time taken to pass on e/m potential on an Aethon to its contiguous neighbour unit distance dA away. If this unit time interval is tA then c = dA/tA. Thus the Aether propagates potentials in a similar, but nevertheless different way, to the way that matter propagates acoustic potentials. Without the substance of the Aether there is no medium to support or to propagate the e/m potentials.

Although the velocity of e/m propagation is locally the constant c, when measured at a distance using units local to the observer (a theoretical measurement only ) the velocity is found to differ. The difference between the local speed of light at a distance r from a gravitating body relative to the velocity at r equals infinity is the gravitational potential at that point. At distance r the Aethon distance unit dr is given by dr = d q 1 − 2m r while the Aethon time unit tr is given by tr = t .q 1 − 2m r . (Where d and t are the units at r equals infinity and m is the gravitating radius of the mass). Thus cr = c 1 − 2m r  and the gravitational potential φ is given by φ = c(cr − c)/2.

Hence gravity is a direct consequence of this non-Euclidean property of the Aether, the non-Euclidean property being caused by the presence of matter. (See the Aether theory of gravity, ATG)


According to Newton, matter, when not subject to a force or accelerating field, moves in a straight line at a constant velocity. This effect is called inertia.

Newtons law of inertia appears at first sight to be straight forward and yet it contains some difficulties. Firstly, the observation of the path and velocity of the matter particle must be made from a frame of reference which is neither accelerating or rotating, termed an inertial frame of reference (IRF). A frame of reference fixed to the surface of the Earth is not an IRF as the Earth rotates both daily and in annual orbit around the Sun. Similarly a frame of reference fixed to the solar system is unsuitable as the Sun rotates around the Milky Way. However Newtons law appears to be true when observed from a frame of reference fixed to distant stars and galaxies.

Ernst Mach evolved the Principle of Inertia in which he proposed that the path of matter and light was not only a straight line relative to the stars and galaxies but also that those paths are actually determined by the matter contained in all the stars and galaxies of the whole universe. However, he failed to describe a mechanism by which this control was effected and no such mechanism has been discovered.

It does not take much consideration to realise that the path of a particle through Space can only be determined through ’contact’ with the substance of Space through which the particle moves, rather as the path of an acoustic wave is determined through and by a material substance. Thus it is the Aether as a physical substance which determines the paths of particles which move through it. Mach was confused by the fact that the distant stars and galaxies effectively act as markers for the Aether. Most stars and galaxies move through the Aether at velocities below 1000 km/s and at their great distances from Earth these low velocities cause an exceedingly small angular movement through the Aether. Hence the stars and galaxies mark the position of the Aether but their position, path and velocity is equally determined by the Aether as is any particle of mass or energy.

The earlier section on e/m potentials and their propagation through the Aether shows that the velocity of light, one aspect of inertia, is determined by the Aether. The path of a light ray is propagated onwards in the original direction unless the path crosses a speed of light gradient (non-Euclidean Aether) in which case the path is bent towards the region of the slower speed of light. Thus the Aether entirely controls the inertia of light. The determination of the path and velocity of matter in the Aether is much more complex, being partly a function of the unknown construction of fundamental mass particles. A hypothesis of a possible construction is given at the end of the section on gravity. This hypothesis explains how the inertia of matter is determined by the Aether in combination with the internal geometry of fundamental mass particles.

Kritische Stimmen zur Relativitätstheorie