Member

Modern physics is based upon the theory of discontinuity, the core postulates of which are: the existence of atoms as the ultimate natural division of matter, their characteristic of inherent and eternal (kinetic) motion, and the existence of a predominant volumetric component of macroscopic matter ? an ?empty space? that allows for a completely uninhibited motion of atoms within it. At the beginning of the last century and through to the 1960?s, this ?empty space? was generally accepted as being a perfect vacuum, and this state was believed to occupy all of outer space and to permeate down through the atmosphere and to separate atomic matter in every state, and both relativity and quantum theories were formulated on this basis. Today the vacuum is acknowledged to be ?a philosophical concept with no basis in reality?, and outer space is no longer considered to be a vacuum, while the ?space between molecules is not a perfect vacuum?. Yet the assumption of an ?empty space? remains, but it is now suggested to contain ?a seething mass of virtual particles?, while at the same time retaining its characteristic of non-impedance of a kinetic atomic motion. Thus today this hypothetical and largest component of matter is a zero-inertia medium, which is, in essence, a return to the concept of a ?luminiferous aether? rejected as ?superfluous? a century ago. Since the early 1980?s electron microscopy has effectively proven the existence of atoms; however, this technology has not provided any evidence whatever of any individual motion or of any separation of atoms; rather, it indicates that atoms are stationary and in close contact, having clearly defined borders with those of adjacent atoms. But theoretical physicists reject this empirical evidence - a rejection I that suggest is motivated by the inevitable, and unacceptable, conclusion that it would require a complete rewrite of current atomic theory. This concept of an ?empty space? is the millstone around the neck of the science of physics (and thus of all science) today, and the reasons were clearly and emphatically articulated by Newton 300 years ago, in that it is neither mathematically nor conceptually possible to describe the transmission of any force, either through a vacuum or through a medium that has a characteristic of zero- inertia. Newton also suggested that atoms were static and that the force of pressure was as a result of atoms ?pressing? on one another. The paper ?The Vacuum and Gravitation? shows that applying this concept to the structure and the interactions of matter at atomic level provides, not only for an explanation for the transmission of gravitation, but conforms to Ockham?s principle in supplying simple, comprehensible explanations for numerous other natural phenomena that are either conceptually inexplicable in terms of current theory, or are so extensive, complex and convoluted that they are effectively so.