As far as I know, the first unambiguous formulation of the luxon hypothesis goes back to H. Zeigler    ( mirror )
H. Zeigler proposed in 1909 that relativity phenomena would be a natural result if the most elemental particles of mass were made of smaller particles that all moved at the constant speed of light. Although the idea easily developed the Lorentz transformations for the most obvious examples of relativity phenomena, it was never fully explored to find if it could explain all phenomena. [...]

H. Ziegler realized this in 1909. He said, "If one thinks about the basic particles of matter as invisible little spheres which possess an invariable speed of light, then all interactions of matter-like states and electrodynamics phenomena can be described and thus we would have erected the bridge between the material and immaterial world that Mr. Planck wanted."

Stated more simply, Mr. Ziegler was saying that if the most basic components of mass all moved at the speed of light, relativity would be the natural result. He saw the cause, constant speed of the components of mass, and the effect, relativity.
The very best other work about the luxon hypothesis is of T.S. Natarajan:
We do not yet understand how an electron "knows" on its own that when some one attempts to accelerate it with very high electric fields it can nottravel faster than the magnitude given by 'c', the velocity of light in vacuum!

The present paper attempts to ask such questions and answer them also by building a new unified foundation for QM and STR by postulating an internal structure to quantum particlessuch as the electrons. It gives a new role to the constant 'c' in physics by bringing this constant into the structure of these particles. [...]

Recent discussions on Schroedinger's "zitterbewegung(zbw)" phenomenon in the literature seem to confirmthis model.It was argued there that "zbw" is a real phenomenon and it corresponds to a particle going along a cylindrical helix in real space with a radius equal to Compton Wavelength giving a striking corroboration to the present proposal. [...]

Time dilation in STR is a well established fact. One of the dramatic proofs of this effect comes from the study of decay times of muons in Cosmic ray showers at the upper atmosphere8. Muons detected at the sea-level compared to the chosen high altitude immediately after their formation should be very small since from the known life-times of muons they should have decayed before reaching the sea-level. But the actual experiment detected at sea level almost the same number of muons. This could be understood on the basis of time dilation of STR. If we apply transformation to the life times of muons in their own rest frame ("proper frame") then the numbers agree well with the experiment.

This means that the fundamental particles seem to carry a "personal-clock" which shows the "proper time" in their own frame, a "local standard of time" irrespective of their motion with respect to any observer anywhere in the universe and they live only according to this local clock. This requires that the fundamental particles must have some periodicity within their structure which helps them to reckon time in their own proper frames. [...]

Every micro particle is endowed with two types of motion, an Internal Motion and an External Motion. The velocities, kinetic energies and momenta of these particles thatwe normally observe and measure in our laboratories are only those corresponding to their external motion.[...]

The magnitude of the instantaneous velocity of the particle, which is the resultant of its internal and external velocities, is always equal to 'c', the velocity of light in free space.[...]

When a particle (say, an electron) is "at rest", it has no external motion but according to postulate I, it has internal motion. This is a circular motion with a radius ao and instantaneous velocity 'c', the velocity of light in air or vacuum. Thus the fundamental particles in this model does not have a state of rest as defined in the classical mechanics.[...]

Thus it is seen that the present model preserves all the results of Einstein Relativity at the same time providing some interesting conceptual justifications for the somewhat non-intuitive consequences of STR such as mass-energy relation, increase of mass with velocity and time dilation. It also give a new interpretation to the role of the velocity of light in physics.
Dr. Albrecht Giese
Relativity without Einstein?   ( mirror )   ( old mirror )

Relativity without Einstein?

True! - The 4-dimensional space-time is no longer necessary to explain relativistic effects!

In 1905, when Einstein looked for an explanation for the constancy of the speed of light, he conceived the four dimensional space-time. There was hardly another solution at that time because there was no knowledge yet about elementary particle physics.

This situation, however, has changed. So there is now an easier and more natural way to understand relativity. Natural means that relativity is based on the traditional understanding of space and time.

Relativity is the consequence of the internal structure of all elementary particles. The cinematic processes inside of an elementary particle are the only reason for the relativistic behavior of matter.

The particle model presented here is a generalization of the so called "Zitterbewegung" of the electron. It is compatible with today's experimental state of particle physics.

(Note: This site is also available as an Adobe Acrobat document.)

  1. The Concept of the Basic Model of Matter

The concept is:
  1. Elementary particles are composed of "basic particles". The basic particles are bound at a specific distance to each other by a field formation.
  2. These basic particles have no mass and orbit each other with the speed of light c.
  3. The orbital frequency is the de Broglie frequency.

If it is assumed that every matter is built up by this way, then the well known relativistic effects are a necessary consequence; as well as some observations explained by quantum mechanics.

That means: Direct consequences of this "basic model" of matter are the principal properties of relativity:
  1. If a configuration of basic particles is moving, the field binding them is contracting by a factor of
    (This, by the way, is true for all types of fields.)
    As a consequence all objects that are built by basic particles are contracting
  2. The orbital period of the basic particles is extended by the same factor g . As a consequence the motion of all objects which are built by basic particles is reduced by this factor g
  3. Objects have an inertial mass. This mass increases at movement by the factor g . [...]

  1.4 Conclusion

The mathematical deduction shows that the basic model of matter, which is founded on particles with no mass that obit each other with the speed of light, is able to explain completely the essential effects of special relativity, namely contraction, dilation of time related processes, and the increase of mass during movement – without any use of the four-dimensional space time. Further it explains Newton's law of motion, the conservation of energy and of momentum, and the mass energy equivalence. [...]  

2.3.3 The "Zitterbewegung"

This result for the electron conforms - together with the other properties of the model - to the parameters resulting from the Dirac equation of the electron. Historically Erwin Schrödinger has evaluated the Dirac equation and he called the circulation of the electron resulting from the Dirac equation (in German) "Zitterbewegung" (zbw). This zbw is classically difficult to understand because it states that the electron performs a permanent oscillation (circulation) with the speed of light, which by Special Relativity is not possible for a particle of mass. [...]

The "basic model" provides a unification of special relativity and quantum mechanics at least to a certain extent. It is a kind of a generalization of the "Zitterbewegung" of the electron as it was conceived by Erwin Schrödinger. [...]

Why is Time Slowed Down in Motion?

The time delay of every kinetic process is the consequence of the fact that matter is built by particles that oscillate permanently with the speed of light.

Elementary particles are generally assumed to comprise at least two constituents. These constituents have no mass and orbit each other with the speed of light. If now an elementary particle is set to motion, but its constituents still have to maintain the speed of light in relation to a fixed reference frame, the orbital frequency is reduced in the way predicted by the theory of relativity. This behaviour propagates to any higher structure in motion.

This means also that for instance every clock will go slower in motion.

M.B. van der Mark and G.W. ’t Hooft wrote in their work " Light is Heavy"
(PDF)   ( mirror )
How to properly weigh something as volatile as a gas? Simply put it in a box so that it doesn’t fly away, and then put it on a symmetric balance.[...]
The same box, but now filled with light, and with the inner walls made perfectly reflecting, can be weighed too.[...]

A combination of both the gas and light examples presented above is offered by the dramatic event of electron- positron pair annihilation. In the simplest case, just two photons are produced. Matter is fully transformed to radiation, but the mass stays. Put on a balance in a box, it is impossible to know whether or not the pair has decayed.
This example shows that the equation E=mc2 expresses the equivalence of mass and energy and not the generation of energy as a reaction product from mass. The confusion that sometimes arises can often be traced back to the mix-up between the words “mass” and “matter”. Matter can be transformed into radiation. Matter is taking the role of energy container, radiation is some sort of released, “free” energy, that must fly through space. [...]

The smaller the length scales, the stronger the forces involved and the higher the (binding) energies, and hence the corresponding masses, relative to the rest masses of the constituents. We could wonder whether this finds it climax at a point where an elementary material particle is build of constituents that have zero rest mass, with only kinetic and potential energy to make up for its mass. That this should be the case for the electron, but at the same time seems quite impossible [3], is well known [4].

What is intriguing is that matter’s most basic building blocks, the elementary particles, all have non-zero spin, intrinsic angular momentum, which seems to imply that they all must have some sort of intrinsic dynamics. Hypothetical structures which do not have internal dynamics, such as point particles and hard spheres, do not exist. So what is matter really made of then? In the Dirac theory, the electron is like electromagnetic energy quivering at light speed, just like a photon in a box [5]. If really so, matter is light. [...]

Rest mass never applies to a system at complete rest, because such systems do not exist; there will always be internal dynamics.
J.G. Williamson and M.B. van der Mark: Is the electron a photon with toroidal topology? (PDF)

Our main motivation for the central postulate stated above arises from a consideration of the experimentally well-established (parapositronium) electron-positron annihilation and creation processes[36]

We have a time evolution of a state containing, on the one hand, two charged spin-half leptons, and on the other uncharged bosons of helicity one. If it were not for the dfferent nature of the states on the left and right side, this reaction would, if taken alone, seem to suggest that the leptons and photons are in fact dfferent states of the same object. Rather than hypothesising a new particle or field which would be the precursor of both the electron and the positron, we have tried to use the photon itself, which is the most obvious physical object with electric and magnetic field components which could give rise to the electron and positron charge and magnetic dipole. [...]

If the electron is indeed constituted by a photon, other elementary particles may also be composed of photon states, but in some other cofiguration to that shown in Fig. 2. The possibility that muons and tauons may be formed by electron-like states with a dfferent internal curvature has been discussed in the literature.[39] We speculate that the hadrons may be described by composite confined photon states. [...]

Despite the dfference in frequency, at any point in space-time these two oscillations must still be in phase, just as they are in the proper frame. This provides a possible physical origin for the postulated law of the "harmony of phases" first proposed by de Broglie, [57, 58] which lies at the origin of quantum mechanics.
Willis H. Thompson
Unified Field Theory From a Different Perspective - the Photon Theory   ( mirror )


The theory, called the Photon Theory, is an effort to achieve a Unified Field Theory that Einstein and his colleagues pursued, that theory explaining mass and gravity in terms of electromagnetic waves.[...]

Photon Theory claims that photons comprise all mass. It follows the rule of complementarity, in that it is consistent with the principles of relativity, except that it explains relativity from a different approach.[...]

When two gamma-ray photons pass very close each can interfere with the other. This interference can cause a complete loop to occur. When it does and under exactly the right conditions, a photon may be trapped in a stable resonant cavity formed by the charge that results from the photon's curved path. This forms a spherical shell structure. As far as is known, only one photon energy level can be stable in this simple structure. An electron is a single photon trapped in a self resonant loop.[...]

Remembering that a massive object is composed of moving photons, then moving a massive object causes it to be more massive. Relative rate of photon field change must increase to accommodate the motion. That composition is also why mass can never exceed the speed of light and why the theory of relativity is real. Relativity is a necessary consequence of the photonic construct of mass.
Robert Rutkiewicz
A General Theory of Particles and Forces    Defining Mass   ( mirror )

Defining Mass

The value of mass is not being redefined. But the concept of mass being a fundamental property is reviewed.

Mass is assumed to be fundamental physical property. The reason for this is obvious. It is something our senses can directly observe through either a mass's weight or the effort it takes to move an object, or impart a velocity. Mass is an unchanging property, conserved through many physical processes. This view was changed with special relativity. The only time mass is lost is when a corresponding amount of energy was released. The conservation of mass-energy replaced the separate concepts of conservation of mass and the conservation of energy. This effect of interchangeable mass and energy is used in high-energy physics but is ignored in our everyday environment.

There is another law of conservation that is required when doing mechanics, conservation of momentum. It is somewhat variable because the same amount of momentum can be found in either a small mass with a high velocity or a large mass with a low velocity. The amount of energy is different between the first example and the next. The exception to this case occurs with elementary particles that are massless. The photon is one of these particles. In this case a photon with twice the energy has twice the momentum, E=cp. If this law could be applied to all particles it would greatly simplify particle physics. Unfortunately, a particle with rest mass can have a variable amount of momentum, just like our everyday experience would tell us. A thought experiment is useful in potentially changing this view. [...]

One result of using momentum formulas is that it shows that mass is not a fundamental property. Momentum is fundamental. For quantum physics, momentum, p and dimension, x are fundamental. (Note: this x implies all dimensions, normal and hyperspace ones, it is different from above where x referred specifically to a normal space dimension. Historical use of x in both of these cases may lead to some confusion. It is hoped that the context they are used makes it clear if x is a general dimension or the normal space dimension.) In fact, special and general relativity effects will be shown to derive from quantum physics. Lorentz contraction and a mass's effect of curving space, creating gravity, are basically the same things. Both effects derive from x p = n h / 2 .

A new physical law is postulated: All known particles are elements of momentum moving at a velocity c. This is the result of extending a quantum theory formula for massless particles to all particles, p=h/2l . The new postulate is known to be true for photons. They have no mass, move at the speed of light and have momentum. At first, the new postulate seems to be untrue for particles with a rest mass. The momentum associated with a particle has a value directly related to the particle's velocity. This statement seems true because the present definition of momentum, p, includes only the three normal spatial dimensions, x, y, z. This new postulate applies for p traveling along all dimensions, including hyperspace ones. The value of a particle's momentum in hyperspace, its rest momentum, is just a particle's mass times the speed of light, p=m0c. This extension is based on special relativity and uses SR equation for mass. [...]

The conservation of momentum can explain the conservation of mass-energy.

Fernando Cleto Nunes Pereira
The Unit of Phisics   ( mirror )

The C velocity of light is found in two basic forms : INTERNAL VELOCITY MOTION (IV) and EXTERNAL VELOCITY MOTION (EV). The IV is the inside the matter shaping its atoms. The EV is outside the bodies.

The addition IV + EV is always equal to the C velocity of light.
The C velocity is the final unit of the universe, a unit pure motion, indivisible in its totality, therefore indestructible and able to suffer variatbles just in the amounts of its IV and EV components.

And displacements of a body immediately provokes an exchange between EV and IV. These compulsory changes in velocities form the mechanism of the universal clock, which is present everywhere, in accordance with the following chart:


(in kilometers per second)

External Velocity + Internal Velocity = ABSOLUTE MOTION


* The internal velocity motion determines the rhythm of the clock present in every single body in the universe. The internal velocity of a body cannot reach 300,000 kilometers per second because the body would explode in light before. [...]

It should be pinpointed that universal motion has two basic directions:

RECTILINEAR - characteristic of light in vacuum;

CURVILINEAR - characteristic of matter, being present in every single body.

The internal velocity of a body determines the rhythm of its clock and the more accelerated it is, the more its direction will undergo a curving, as well as the bigger its ruler and its interaction forces will be. When the rhythm is over, the clock, the ruler and the weight disappear and only light in its rectilinear direction will be left. [...]

If we consider the second pillar exposed here, we can point out the other extreme situation of the main equation. We would then have EV=0 (IV=A). In absolutism, nothing can exist motionless in the cosmos. Everything has light velocity, so it is easy to conclude that EV=0 (IV=A) would be the same thing as EV=A (it would be light), since not a single body could be motionless in the universe. [...]



In accordance with Special Relativity, light velocity is the highest velocity there can be in the universe. It is rated as "C" velocity (universal constant) and its characteristic of light in vacuum. Its amount is estimated at 300,000 kilometers per second.

In absolutism, "C" velocity is present all over the physical universe, which starts being regarded as a closed inertial system where absolute is formed by the addition of both external and internal changeable velocities, which always add up to "C" when they are together. By taking for granted that motion is absolute , I thought it would be more sensible to replace letter "C" for letter "A".

Having drawn this first comparison, it is possible to conclude that while relativistic physics ignores the existence of absolute motion, absolutist physics considers it as its main foundation, thus aiming at expanding the approach developed by Einstein.

In Relativity, the "C" light velocity, despite its cosmic invariability, cannot be rated as a reference to the measure of universal timing. Thus, no "observer" can know about his own velocity in the universe.

In absolutist physics, the "A" motion cannot be rated as a reference, either, since everything in the universe has the same absolute light velocity. So, there cannot be any reference outside the "observer", who will only be able to measure external motions different from his. Nobody can know about his true rhythm (his actual external or internal velocity.)

Relativistic physics teaches that when the velocity of body gets closer to light velocity, a clock coupled to such a body starts working more slowly. If that body could reach the light velocity proper (something that it actually can't do), the watch would stop and remain away from time.

In absolutist physics, any material state is made of moving units that can considered as small clocks having the "A" motion. They are absolute units and at the same time they are elastic in their external and internal velocity variables. As all the bodies would be shaped by the union of small clocks, we can conclude that any single body in the universe would be a clock. Everything that happened to be valid for an "A" final unit would also be valid for the whole universe. Whenever a body approached the highest external velocity, its internal velocity would decrease at the same proportion (the rhythm of the clock). If the body could go on (it wouldn't be able to reach the highest external velocity, which is pertinent to light), it would also stay away from time - as it happens in relativity - with a stopped clock of its own.

Bob Toben, Fred Wolf and Jack Sarfatti
Space-time and beyond, 1975
My Idea that matter is gravitationally self-trapped light is simply an expression of Einstein´s famous formula E = Mc2. When a particle meets an antiparticle to create pure light, the photons that make up the particle and the antiparticle simply escape their traps.
Russel Clark send me this Email:
Thema: Luxon Theory
Datum: 30.07.97 02:39:28
From: rsclark1@ix.netcom.com
To: Kirchmann@tardyon.de

In support of your rather interesting theory the following: Imagine, as you say, that matter is indeed travelling at the speed of light all the time, even when it appears to be at rest. The initial momentum of a given mass then might be,
   p = m(ic)
Now when the mass is accelerated to a velocity v, the mass' new velocity becomes,
   v'= sqrt[v**2 + (i**2)c**2] =   v'= sqrt[v**2 - c**2]  
such that the final momentum of the mass is now
   p'= m' x sqrt[v**2 - c**2]
If we equate the intial momentum with the final momentum (conservation of 4-momentum, if you will) we have,
   m(ic) = m' x sqrt[v**2 - c**2] yielding,

   m = m'/(ic) x sqrt[v**2 - c**2]
   ic = sqrt[i**2 x c**2] = sqrt[-c**2]
so that
m = m'/sqrt[-c**2] x sqrt[v**2 - c**2] = m = m' x [1 - v**2/c**2]
such that
   m' = m/[1 - v**2/c**2]
which is just the special relativistic mass formula of Einstein. The coefficient "i" comes into play in the above manipulations because multiplication by "i" or e**(i)pi/2 is the only way to rotate a vector in 3 space without producing another vector within the same 3 space; multiplication by "i" takes a 3-vector out of the 3-d manifold and so represents the relationship of time to the other three spatial axes.
There are other reasons for, perhaps, including the coefficient "i" within quantum tunneling, for example, as in the case of matter tunneling through a hyperspherical potential barrier while appearing at rest in 3 spatial dimensions.

Moreover, we may integrate the momentum of a mass, m, as it is accelerated from a velocity v(init.) = ic to a final velocity v(fin.) = c. This yields,
   Intgrl[mv]dv  (v = ic to v = c) = 1/2 mv**2 
evaluated between the limits of v = ic and v = c which yields,
   1/2m(c**2) - 1/2m(i**2 x c**2) = mc**2
Of course the energy of motion is just the integral of the momentum from the initial to the final velocities.

Best Regards,

Russell Clark

Anthony Seratites
After a UFO experience many years ago, Anthony Seratites, a Dow Chemical engineer, was suddenly awakened to a new concept of matter and energy, being shown, way back then, that there is no ultimate particle in physics as it was being taught, that what appears to be protons, electrons, gluons, muons, quarks, neutrinos, etc., and all their invisible to us anti-particles, are nothing more than photon quanta organized in different ways. [...]
Seratites' diagram of an electron alone had same 228 parts. He spent years developing his concepts and diagramed many atoms in a book titled THE STRUCTURAL NATURE OF MATTER, and then went on to diagram more atoms and same molecules in another volume called THE UNIVERSAL FIELD LAW and THE UNIVERSAL LAW OF CREATION OF MASS/ ENERGY. both by Anthony D. Seratites. What he learned was that matter can be instantly converted to anti-matter by simply inverting the quanta, which changes its direction of spin, and that they mutually repel each other and do not seek to cancel out.
Morris M. Tamres
The Theory is that all matter in the Universe is composed of PHOTONS . Conditions of temperature, density, and pressure determine the nature of solidified states of photon configurations much as steam "freezes" into water and water "freezes" into hail, snow, or ice.
Steven E. Kaufman
Unified Reality Theory   ( mirror )

Matter as associations of electromagnetic radiation
Matter is made up of the accumulation, association, or interaction of the stuff we call energy. We can relate matter to electromagnetic radiation through the concept of energy. If matter is energy, through E = mc2, and electromagnetic radiation is energy, through E = f x h, then the energy of matter may be the energy which is electromagnetic radiation.
For example, let us say you have two small wooden chairs, and you want to make a single larger chair. In combining the two chairs you end up with a couple of left over pieces of wood that are not needed to compose the structure of the new larger chair. So you toss them aside. This is what the stars are doing in nuclear fusion. When combining hydrogen atoms into a heavier atom, some of the constituent pieces that make up the hydrogen atoms are not needed to compose the structure of the single heavier atom, and so are tossed aside or released. What is released from stars through fusion is electromagnetic radiation, part of which we perceive as visible light. Therefore, it is not unreasonable to postulate that hydrogen atoms are composed, at least in part, of constituent pieces in the form of electromagnetic radiation.
Therefore, the chain of logic linking electromagnetic radiation to gravitation begins bypostulating that matter is, at least in part, focal accumulations of interacting or structurally associated electromagnetic wavicles. Put another way, when two or more electromagnetic wavicles form a stable association, that association exists as matter.
Alfredo A. Barrera
When we measure the mass of an object by weighing it, we are measuring 
as its mass at rest the moving mass together with the resting mass of
the particles that make it up. There is no such thing as mass totally
at rest. Moving mass is resting mass, if it is confined to an
infinitesimal volume. Mass at rest is a relative concept.
Ray Tomes
Towards a Theory Of Everything: Matter as a Solution to Maxwell's Equations   ( mirror )
If I am on the right track with all the above, then it follows that matter is a standing wave of electromagnetism. I am not the first person to believe that matter could be some form of standing wave of electromagnetism. The problem is that there has seemed to be no way that energy can be confined to make a particle, even if it has some sort of wave nature, as electromagnetic waves are "known" to dissipate at the speed of light. In cosmology it is always assumed that hot matter, that is anything that propagates at light speed, has a tendency to distribute itself evenly throughout the universe. This common knowledge is mistaken. There are a set of solutions to Maxwell's equations which have very uneven distributions of energy throughout space which are essentially stable with time. These solutions are, I believe, the solutions which describe matter.

What then is the explanation for the famous Michelson-Morley experiment? The answer is that 100 years ago it was not realised that matter might be based entirely on electromagnetism. It still largely isn't. But when it is understood that the apparatus of the interferometer is made of the same stuff as the light rays, it can be appreciated that exactly the same effects happen to the apparatus as to the light. That is, they each have the same variations of light speed, and therefore change of wavelength, and so a null result is to be expected. The experiment is really a very powerful demonstration of the fact that matter is standing electromagnetic waves. Lorentz almost understood this in his explanation for his famous contraction.
Javier de Juan Díaz
One of the Principles of this Theory is that the differential elements of the equator-ring of all particles always move at the speed of light. As both rings of the electron coincide, the differential elements of charge of the electron always travel at the speed of light.

The origin of mass is clearly defined by this Theory. One of its conclusions is "Mass is just movement. And its behaviour is ruled by two simple laws". Concerning the importance of this statement, this is what Fermilab physicist Chris Hill says: "Understanding the origin of mass would be an achievement on a par with the greatest scientific strides in history, like Newton's establishing the universal law of gravitation or Einstein's connection of energy to mass and the speed of light".

The circular electric currents originated by the turning of the charge-rings constitute the origin of the nuclear forces and at the same time they are the intermediate step between mass energy and electromagnetic radiation energy. This is the mechanism used by Nature for any energy transformation.

To summarize we may consider all manifestation of matter as whirls that turn around their own axes, so that the equatorial speeds always equal the speed of light. Mass and energy at rest vary proportionally with the turning frequency and size decreases proportionally with mass, energy and frequency. Mass is just movement. When movement ceases mass disappears. Particles are surrounded by circular charge-rings, which turn with the frequency of the corresponding particle and the charge of every ring is equal to the fundamental electric charge.

There is another point, not yet understood by Science, which is also explained by this Theory. As energy of matter is mc2 , there must be some intimate relationship between matter, even at rest, with the speed of light. This Theory gives the explanation: the speed of light is always reached inside each whirl, which is the elementary block of matter. The equator always turns so that the linear speed of all its differential elements is the speed of light.

Scott Barclay
Gravitational / Universal Engineering   ( mirror )
Mass can be visualized as standing electromagnetic waves, oscillating in the medium of space. Mass then consists almost entirely of space, containing nodes of standing waves. A large mass containing a large amount of energy would need to include many harmonic and dimensional variations of electromagnetic oscillation frequencies. [...]
The speed of light may represent the maximum rate that fundamental elements are created or can be activated. This could be due to a mathematical and Universal probability limit. Mass, which is composed of standing waves, also could not propagate faster than this.
Domingo S. Acosta:
THE INERTIAL MASS   ( mirror )
portada In this web page you can read fragments of the book "The Inertial Mass" published June 1998. It shows a model that is able to explain the mass in its inertial aspect (not gravitational). A possible, rational and complete explanation of this phenomenon . Did you know that the mass is one of the biggest riddles of the twentieth century?

Do you know what the mass is ? Why does time dilate? Why does the mass get bigger when we accelerate it? Can you understand why c is the maximum possible speed?

For the first time all the answers!!! In:

To understand all the associated phenomenology that gives form to the Theory of Special Relativity.

With this model the S.R. can be understood easily like any known mechanism of common life.


The book : "THE INERTIAL MASS" you can continue enjoying this passionate theory and one of the most interesting and recent ideas about the Mass, the Inertia and Special Relativity.

Applying the old method of the black box to the study of mass, soon it reveals as a system able to interaction with the exterior through input and output impulses. Curiuosly, the increase of mass and its two possible observable magnitudes, as we know, dilation, of time and speed, seem to come from the balance between the input-output impulses. Finally all this has reason when we consider mass as a particular structure of impulses. [...]

What does it mean that time dilates ? Why is it impossible to exceed the velocity of light ? Why does mass increment when it is accelerated ?. We only know that the formulas say so and that it all seems to wok that way as experiments show us, but why ?

Till now, no theory has explained the underlying mechanism that causes such things to happen. In fact, you don't have to be a genius to work out that the Relativity Theory falls short on common sense. [...]

We can now ask ourselves what precisely is the nature of this state of minimal energy in our balance of accounts ? In other words, if we have a mass "A" for one direction and a mass "B" for another each constituted by masses under uni-directional impulses, what impulses and in what direction do they operate when the mass system is in a state of rest or minimum energy ? We can only say that whatever they may be they have the important characteristic of allowing increases of energy in any direction (I :E : omni-direcctional ) when an impulse arrives and is integrated to the mass system. We also know that it can be assumed that they must be in a state of balance for no resulting movement to exist. Could the initial mass be an amalgam of impulses from all directions ? [...]

Is mass really just a collection of impulses ? In any case all seems to indicate that both the mass gained and the mass lost are dependant on a flow of impulses in one direction or another. With this in mind , we can begin to perceive the movement from another perspective since, apparently it depends between the degree of imbalance between impulses in one direction and from its opposite which make up the total mass of the system. Mass can then be outlined as a set made up of different quantities of impulse in one direction and its opposite. In fact, if we take into account that the described mechanism of reaction works on mass objects when impulse is applied from any direction, then, we must consider mass as a set consisting of impulses in all potential directions or as an omnidirectional set of impulses. On the other hand , the fact that the impulses available to respond in any one direction eventually run out clearly indicates that the quantity of available impulses in a mass x for any given direction are finite and quantifiable.

If we think of mass in a state of rest as an omni-directional system of bounded impulses, in other words, a system under tension but in equilibrium and that velocity is a state of imbalance between the impulses in a direction and its opposite, then, we can assume that the arrival of a given volume of unit-directional impulses added to those already present in the initial mass and moving in the same direction would cause different amounts of imbalance depending on whether they enter a larger or smaller original volume of mass. Thus reinforcing the idea of this model where mass is described as a "system of omni-directional impulses"...
Dan Dunn
The Gilbert Letter   ( mirror )
...according to Professor Morton, helicoid atoms (as he calls them) fit naturally into the scheme of Relativity. As he puts it, "the speed of light is constant because all clocks are made of atoms, and atoms are like windmills. The wind would have a constant speed if you used a windmill as a clock to measure it." [...]

The most amusing thing (to me) in Gilbert's letter is the explanation of Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity. Imagine using a windmill as a clock. You would have to define one revolution of the windmill as "one second" no matter how fast or slow it revolved. Indeed, if you tried to measure the speed of the wind using a windmill as a clock you will always get the same result-- i.e. a constant speed. If all clocks are, in fact, made up of "helicoid particles," then that means that the motions of the clocks are an amplified version of the motions of the particles, so clocks spin slower when the particles that make them up spin slower. When the particles slow down, the clocks slow down. Because all sub-atomic particles "spin" in electromagnetic fields the way that windmills spin in the wind, the speed of propagation of any electromagnetic field (i.e. the speed of light) is constant.
James Rees
The Unit Particle of Matter Substructure Theory, and the subsequent distinction between matter and energy as components of Standard Model particles deduce that rest mass is the internal energy structural energy.

Rest mass energy is the structural
energy of the particle.

The rest mass of a particle is determined by the internal unit matter substructure of the particle.

The energy bound in a particle structure as rest mass must rotate at harmonic intervals in the closed loop. The closed loop of the energy in the particle structure is required to be at harmonic intervals.

It must be stated that energy rotation about a host unit particle of matter is not proposed to be anything like the planets orbiting the Sun. Energy rotation about its host is a complex action and is described by the wave function of the particle. Moving images of wave functions are extremely enlightening. The math tells it all.

For instance, electrons have a singlet unit particle of matter substructure with a single energy loop hosted by a single unit particle of matter. The circumference of the .51 MeV energy loop has a fundamental harmonic such that exactly two rotations of the energy and the energy is at the same exact phase. The circumference of the energy loop of the electron, curiously enough, occurs at half the wavelength, which is why it takes two rotations of energy (720º) around the electron for the energy to be at the same phase.

Special Relativity: Why rest mass increases with velocity?

The present understanding is mass increases with velocity according to the relativistic equations. Which is of course, is correct.

A particle with a rest mass has to have infinite energy to travel at the speed of light. That covers what, now we want to know how?

The proposed new mechanical insight however is: because the rest mass-energy of a particle is a closed loop, there is always a component of the energy in the loop which works against the momentum of the particle as the particle moves through the background of matter.

In other words, rest mass energy is an energy that because of its closed loop nature drags on the background, and the drag increases with velocity according to the relativistic equations.

It would take an infinite amount of energy to overcome the negative influence of the retrograde energy in the closed loop of the particle structure which causes basically, drag through the background of matter.

Rest mass energy and momentum energy are made from the same quantities, units of energy.

It is proposed, that strictly according to the relativistic equations, what is physically meant by rest mass increasing with velocity is that it takes increasingly more momentum energy to move that rest mass through the background (space) at greater velocity.

A rest mass particle has velocity due to the addition of momentum energy to its rest mass energy. The physical reason behind the relativistic equations indicating the diminishing returns for the addition of momentum energy toward increasing the velocity of a particle with a rest mass is due to that as the velocity of the rest mass approaches the speed of light, the retrograde energy in the internal structure of the particle (its rest mass) causes greater and greater resistance against the background of matter.

John T. Nordberg
Grand Unification Theory - The Ball-of-Light Particle Model   ( mirror )
The Ball-of-Light Particle Model is a Grand Unification Theory. It states that all elementary particles--that is, individual particles--are spherical, standing waves of electric, magnetic, and gravitational fields--that is, balls of light. The general equation for this Grand Unification Theory is Electric cross Magnetic equals Gravitational.
When thinking of the Ball-of-Light Particle Model, just remember Einstein's famous equation, E = mc2. Matter can be converted into energy and energy can be converted into matter because matter is made of energy--light spinning around itself in spherical standing waves of electric, magnetic and gravitational energy.
In other words, matter is made of light spinning around itself. This is very intuitive to most scientists, or anyone familiar with E = mc2. It is well known that matter can be converted into energy and energy can be converted into matter. Why? Because matter is made out of energy. Matter is simply electromagnetic and gravitational energy--that is, a form* of "light"--spinning around itself. Matter is spherical, standing waves of electro-magnetic-gravitational energy.
Elementary particles are superimposed combinations of photons.

Vernon Brown
The Photonic Theory of Everything   ( mirror )

H. Ziegler pointed out in 1909 that if the most elemental constituents of mass all moved at the invariable speed of light, relativity would be a natural result given the classic view of space-time. This idea has been investigated many times during the last hundred years and no one has been successful in their attempts to refute it. The Lorentz equations that describe relativistic effects fall right out of Zieglers construct. Nothing else is needed; it's all right there.

We can assert now that the most elemental components of mass do all move at the invariable speed of light just as Ziegler suggested a hundred years ago. That is how nature makes relativity. [...]

H. Ziegler was among the first to realize that any field theory that has the electromagnetic field as its final irreducible constituent must produce relativity phenomena in classic space-time. With that construct of matter there is no need for the idea of variable space-time. Relativity phenomena is the natural consequence of that construct. It is the matter, not space and time, that must change to accomodate its motion. The time experience of matter in motion must also change as a result of its motion.

There is a way to describe photons such that everything in the universe must necessarily be a natural consequence of photonic interaction. Photons of this flavor agree with experiment and behave in accord with most of the rules of quantum physics but they depart from the most cherished notion of that science and avoid its unreasonable ideas. These photons consist of saturated points of electric and magnetic amplitude in fields of electric and magnetic force that permeate all the fabric of space.

This photonic universe must necessarily exist in non-varying space and time in the classic-common sense. [ Classic Space-Time ] All massive objects are made of photons that move at the constant speed of light. Because of this, they must necessarily experience space and time differently when the mass is moving. The phenomenon of relativity is the natural result of the construct of mass and is not a property of space or time. [7]

When we develop equations to predict how this kind of mass must change with movement we find that we have reproduced equations first developed by H. A. Lorentz at the turn of the twentieth century. His "Lorentz transformations" accurately describe the observed changes in mass moving in different inertial frames of reference.

Photons are thus at the root of all things and this may seem much different from the standard-model universe. It is not so much different, however. Einstein's theory of relativity still holds, for example, and his equations still work to describe observed changes in massive objects in motion. We changed only the assumptions that were at odds with reasonable cause.

According to the theory of relativity and according to observations, adding movement to any massive object makes it more massive. Some portion of the massiveness of any moving object must therefore be due only to movement.

All the components of mass are in a jumble of related motion. Protons, neutrons, electrons, atoms, and molecules comprise mass; they all vibrate and orbit and whiz around inside of mass. So rest mass can only be imagined, never really measured, but most scientists assume that there is a fundamental kind of massiveness called rest mass. So, now we have massiveness which is due only to movement, and another fundamental kind of mass called rest mass.

We have a real problem now. How can we tell the difference between movement mass and rest mass? What fundamental thing can we measure so that we can say for sure that this is movement mass and this is rest mass.

We might measure the overall relative movement of a chunck of mass; calculate what mass would be due to that movement; subtract that from the total mass and say what's left is rest mass. But then what about the vibration of the molecules; that's movement. What about the electrons whizzing about protons and such. All those movements can't really be known except, maybe, in a statistical sense. But wait; is this even reasonable? Probably not!

It is not reasonable in nature that there could be two fundamentally different kinds of massiveness. We know for sure that we have mass that is due only to movement. However, we do not know and can never measure, that kind of mass known as rest mass. Maybe it is that all of massiveness is really due only to the movement of some fundamental thing in nature. With that idea we are off the hook. Everything now makes sense. We have only one kind of mass; it is comprised only of the movement of some fundamental thing in nature.

Since the most fundamental thing in nature is the photon, massiveness must be due in some way to photon movement, or more exactly, mass must actually be that which is the photon; changing electromagnetic fields. From photons we know that energy; therefore massiveness; is directly related to the rate of change of the photon's fields. Mass is directly perportional to the rate of change of the photon fields that comprise it. From this idea alone and knowing that photons are quantized we can develop the mass equation: m = hv / c2. Or said more clearly; mass is electromagnetic change.


Everything in nature points to this. The equation that Henri Poincare wrote down in 1900 said it first. Poincare wrote, E = mc2 to show how much acceleration a pulse of light gave to particles of mass and Albert Einstein showed several years later that this equation described the fundamental relationship between all of energy and mass.

       GUESTBOOK        LUXON THEORY        TIME THEORY        OVERVIEW        DOWNLOAD        MY LINKPAGE          
       LUXON THEORY         ENERGY         RELATIVITY         INERTIA         E=mc 2         OTHER         <   >        

Mail to: Kirchmann