Revolutionary Atomic Model

                     Excerpts From The Introduction

The Shallow, Troubled Waters of Modern Science

Considering the many achievements of science and technology over the past few centuries, it is beyond strange that our fundamental understanding of things has not really advanced much in many respects. Within our ad hoc collection of foundational science there remains a vast number of unanswered questions, superficial explanations and boldfaced contradictions. Having labeled and described things, often with rigorous mathematics, we mistakenly think we understand them, when deep down we do not.     Mainstream science has for instance no clue what fundamentally causes gravity, mass, inertia, magnetism, electricity and a whole lot of other things that are otherwise very familiar to us and reasonably well described mathematically.....

Science in its present, dare I say geriatric state of development, has become far too preoccupied with refining the data and tweaking existing ideas rather than getting on with its primary business of shedding light on the many remaining mysteries of our universe.   With the recent advent of the new millennium it seems high time to get a little introspective and take a fresh look at a whole lot of things. Einstein himself said that we should regularly question what we think we know to ensure that we are building on a firm foundation. As it turns out, the foundation is actually full of cracks and missing pieces that threaten to bring the whole house down.....

In the Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Thomas Kuhn points out that the scientific establishment usually ridicules revolutionary discoveries, specifically because they call into question what we think we know and damage our inflated egos. Invariably, academic science tends to suppress fundamental novelties, because they are by nature a dire threat to the entrenched pet theories of the establishment, which prides itself on its firm grasp of “reality”.....

Ideally, scientists should always conduct their research from a perspective of complete objectivity, but as Halton Arp points out in his recent book, Seeing Red: Redshifts, Cosmology and Academic Science, the reality is rather disheartening.   Intellectual arrogance, close mindedness, turf wars and outright suppression of competing ideas, appears to run rampant in the “science industry” ......

We have also developed the very bad habit of choosing not to believe the facts before us simply because they challenge well-entrenched theories. To disregard solid facts in favor of outmoded theory is not science at all, but rather a hallmark of a poor and blind religion.   At the time of Copernican revolution, the Church was appropriately branded for this form of blindness, but the shoe now appears to be solidly on the other foot, with the scientific community in comical fashion committing the same infraction, zealously defending the hopelessly complex planetary atomic model in order to preserve the existing incorrect dogmas, introduced by various untouchable icons of science including Bohr, Rutherford, Einstein and others.....

Even Newton’s insights regarding gravity are still only skin deep, offering very little real improvement over Kepler’s purely geometric description of orbits.   How the sun manages to reach across “empty” space at apparently infinite velocity to forcefully confine all the planets in their orbits, without any apparent energy source to do all this astronomical work, remains a complete mystery within Standard theory. From our superficial perspective, gravity clearly defies the law of energy conversation, despite the veneer of nonsense and smoke and mirrors from the misappropriated Work Function (W=Fd), which is routinely invoked to gloss over our incredible ignorance of all things natural.....

The same sad situation exists with electricity and magnetism. How is it, that an isolated charge or permanent magnet can provide a continuous force that can perform endless amounts of real work without any apparent energy source? We don’t even really know what an electric or magnetic field is, let alone its energy source.    The bottom line of all of this is that all forces evidently require a continuous supply of energy regardless of any apparent motion.....

Similar problems arise with the many “black boxes” and “Alice in Wonderland” antics of Cosmology, Astrophysics, Quantum Mechanics and so on, as just a few more obvious areas begging for refinement and deeper understanding. The whimsical domain of indeterminate Quantum Mechanics, with all its inherent uncertainties, and inconsistencies is particularly in need of a major overhaul, if it is ever to be reconciled with the deterministic nature of the macroscopic world we know.

The QM wizards are far too quick to resign themselves to “normalization” of infinite values and other bizarre practices that seem to have more in common with a Harry Potter fantasy than reality.   What is behind all of this stuff? If any real progress is to be made, these many deficiencies must be addressed in a bold new fashion.....

One must agree that the ultimate value of any scientific theory or model lies in its ability to logically account for observed phenomena and to accurately predict behavior in a highly deterministic and concise fashion. In this regard, the shortcomings and objections to the Bohr-Rutherford model of the atom and its various refinements, are both numerous and well documented as just one case in point.

As the primary focus of our inquiry, it does not provide any satisfying, or logical explanation for the fundamental mechanism of chemical bonds, bond angles, crystal structure, allotropes, nuclear bonds. Nor does it shed any light on the underlying structure and assembly of the various subatomic particles including the electron, positron, neutron and proton, not to mention the elusive quarks and other “virtual” particles. Such fanciful ideas remain highly suspect due to the general refusal to accept the obvious necessity of interactions between matter and the highly energetic vacuum of space......

© 2006