Dr. Frank Meno and The Structure of the Universe

In 1990, I came to Pittsburgh, PA. I was looking for support to start my graduate studies in Electrical Engineering. I just came from Yugoslavia (the country about to be destroyed by the wave of ethnic wars of 1990's). At the University of Pittsburgh I talked with several professors among them my future advisor Dr. Bob Sclabassi. He invited me for an interview to check me out as a potential candidate for a Research Assistanship in his group. I met several people who asked me all kinds of questions. At some point I was told that the next person I would talk to was Dr. Frank Meno (pictured here). The name did not mean anything to me at the time. Just another Ph.D. that would grill me about various technical and scientific problems.

He came in. He greeted me in a fluent Serbian language...

I was a bit surprised. Nobody mentioned to me that long time ago Dr. Meno came from the same country (just another part, now Slovenia). We had a long and pleasant talk about various things.

I got my assistanship in Bob's group and I had an opportunity to talk with Dr. Meno many times about his work.

At first I thought that Frank was just a very good Engineer and Inventor that was helping Bob realize some of his neuroscience projects. That was all true, but soon after I found out there was more about Frank's work that sparked my interest. In his spare time, Frank was working on a physical theory. Later I've learned that Frank actually started as a Physicist who went into Engineering. Well, he came up with an idea about the Real Structure of the Universe and the Theory of Physical Reality that might be correct. One day it just hit me. I was in the presence of one of The Greats. Sir Isaac Newton, James Clerk Maxwell, Michael Faraday, Albert Einstein, Nikola Tesla, and Frank Meno. He was one of them. He filled the gap that existed for so long in the world of Physics.

I had an honor to be his friend. Somehow, I was able to peek into the minds of Sir Isaac Newton and the others through my discussions with Frank. Sometimes I would really thought he knew them. Probably because he read most of their works in the original form. Without "interpretations".

Frank was born on January 7, 1934 in Slovenia. On Tuesday, September 7, 2010, Frank passed away in Pittsburgh, PA. The cause of death was pneumonia. This post was started on March 12, 2010, while Frank was still alive and I hoped to surprise him with it. Unfortunately, I was not able to work on it for a while. In October of 2010 I sent a message to Frank with information about a research that was related to his. He never replied. I assumed he went to Slovenia. After a while I started thinking that it was strange he was not getting back to me, but I thought he was busy as usual with his research and his writings. A few months ago a friend of mine sent me a message with the news. Frank could not get back to me because he had to go away. He had to go far, far away to meet his friends. Sir Isaac, James, Michael, Albert, and Nikola. They are all together now.

This is probably the most important post of my life. Maybe the most important writing. At least to me. I will make it a "live post" today. That is, you may follow it and come back to see the progress as I am working on it.

Gyrons

The Frank's Universe is composed of just two things:

• Empty Space or Void
• Gyrons: tiny particles that swirl around and when grouped in a vortex or wave structures they can be observed as electrons, positrons, photons and such.

Everything in the Universe is made of Gyrons. The only other thing is the continuous Void which is completely empty. Much more empty compared to Vacuum as we will find out.

Background

I was always puzzled with the works of Newton, Faraday, and Maxwell. The field theories: Gravity, Electricity, Magnetism. These giants of science were honest enough to admit that they never could fully understand the real nature of the phenomena they were studying. They were able to detect these fields, measure it to some extent, but not to explain it or to figure out the true origins of it.

Later on, the scientists in 20th century, like Einstein, Bohr and others thought they stumbled upon new ways of describing physical reality. They thought they found a way to dig deeper into the atomic structure, etc. No question that they were brilliant scientific minds. Unfortunately, they were frustrated and eager to push for more progress at the expense of true understanding of the nature of things in the sense of Newton. The major difference between the Newton-Faraday-Maxwell on one end and Einstein-Bohr at the other end is not coming from the data they could observe. True, the 20th century brought many new methods of experimentation and many new results that could be used in research. The major difference came in the methodology of scientific research. While for Newton it would be unacceptable to use pure fantasy and rough approximations and assumptions to describe the origins of a physical field, for Bohr and to some extent Einstein it was 'ok' to promote probability into the major tool for understanding and description of physical reality. It was acceptable to use fantasy as a basis for the artificially designed virtual mathematical worlds that are supposed to be a 'best fit' to the experiments they have observed. They moved physics into the domain of Religion by forcing us to 'believe' into their equations and axioms claiming that it is not necessary to understand the physical reality. It is enough to be able to predict the outcomes of experiments within a reasonable margin of error and to understand equations, not the Reality.

Statistics and probability can be powerful in many situations. Unfortunately, they cannot replace the true understanding of the nature of things. They are used in situations where the true physical models are either not available or are too complex to handle due to the huge number of variables that are involved in calculations and mathematical derivations. However, they should never be promoted to the level of the fundamental Laws of Physics. Even Einstein realized some time later this fact when he wrote that famous line: "God does not play dice." By then, it was too late. The new Religion of Physics was already created.

So, where is that point where the deterministic kinetics of individual particles starts to get some statistical properties? We start looking at such approach when the number of particles or elements under study becomes too large to be treated purely computationally or when the equations that are used are nonlinear and extremely hard to solve in traditional ways. We end up using statistics. We also end up making simplifying assumptions and we would often say that the statistical results we obtain are good only within certain region or under more or less ideal conditions, etc. That works in most of the cases since the outcomes of such experiments are often important only on a large scale and on the average since we may not be interested in all little details of what kind of effects may exists at the fringes.

But how could we then explain the question of deterministic vs. probabilistic view of the world? In my view, that really comes from the vantage point. For a person or an instrument that observes an experiment the physical process or the outcomes of the experiments may appear as being random or statistical in nature. However, at the point of origin and at the scale on which the experiment is really generated there is often nothing random going on, but very deterministic process that unfortunately is not possible to fully observe or grasp from the vantage point of the observers. In such way the observers are getting frustrated and may fall into a trap of promoting quite valid probabilistic theories into the fundamental Laws of Physics. Clearly, there is nothing 'fundamental' within these theories. They are just used as an aid in situations where we actually failed at the true understanding of the problems. So, we try the workarounds and we try to poke deeper into the problem in hope to find better models.

We have a free will. We really do. That is because we are so ignorant. And that is a good thing!

This problem is related to the Information. Many times events appear to be random due to the lack of information. If the proper information was available, the outcomes of many events would not look as random as we originally thought. The same principle applies to physical reality. If we would really understand the physical reality fully and would be able to grasp it completely, nothing would look random to us. Fortunately, even if we get closer to understanding the physics of the Universe we may still not be able to compute the future outcomes and we could still function in more or less similar way as we do now thinking that we have a "free will". We actually do. Because we are so ignorant. And that is a good thing...

Frank Meno did not give up when he was faced with the lack of true Information about the Universe. He did not get frustrated enough to be defeated in his quest. He did not seek an easy way out. He eventually postulated a theory of Physical Reality that in my opinion is very elegant and may be very close if not completely correct when it comes to explaining the true origins of the physical fields I was so much puzzled about.

Void or Vacuum, and the Action on Distance

Before we can talk about gyrons we need to understand the difference between the void and the vacuum. Traditionally, vacuum was assumed for long time to be completely empty. However, at some point it was postulated that the only way the action on distance could be possible was as if the vacuum was not really empty and it would contain some sort of a medium. That medium was named aether. When you mention aether to physicists, they all behave like a priest who just ran into Devil. The modern day physics does not accept the existence of aether. It is funny, but it seems that while the physicists keep talking more and more about space and structure of space and how space is being created and how it bubbles, etc., they are actually describing aether in all kinds of new and crazy ways without having courage to just say it plain and simple: Aether exists! The reason for this type of behavior is in the old models of aether, or the so called Luminiferous Aether, that were used in the past. The model created by Frank is different in a few important ways as it will become apparent below.

So, in order to avoid confusion with terminology, Frank started using the term void in place of vacuum, and Aether in place of luminiferous aether or ether. The void would be really and completely empty space that has absolutely no properties. Back in 2006, Frank sent me a message that summarized this:

How can any rational being ascribe properties to empty space? Empty space means that there is nothing in it, and nothing cannot have any properties. It cannot be curved or straight.

If the space is not empty, then the first thing in physics is to specify what it is. I just call it aether.

Aether permeates the void completely. All existing particles and objects in the Universe as well as all observed and unobserved phenomena encountered in the Universe are the consequence of the modulations of aether.

But what is aether? What is it made of?

The simplest answers are: It is a fluid. It is made of gyrons. And that is what we are going to dig into next.

Gyrons. How do they look?

Here is a drawing that Frank created to illustrate the approximate shape of gyrons.

All gyrons are of the exactly same shape and same size. They are indestructible and absolutely rigid. The collisions of gyrons are elastic. They do not have gravitational mass as it will become apparent soon. They only have a tiny amount of inertial mass. More precisely, at that scale, the gravitational mass does not exist and it has no meaning since the gravity is generated by the gyrons themselves at a larger scale of material particles. For these reasons the motion of gyrons may be completely described using kinematics.

All that there is in the Universe are the Void and Gyrons. There is nothing else.

As previously mentioned, the Void is absolutely empty space and Gyrons are the only rigid objects out there. They are extremely small. Frank estimated that the approximate size (length) of a gyron is 10^(-35) of a meter. He was not able to estimate their thickness and exact shape. But he suggested that the thickness would have to be much smaller compared to the length. The above figure shows the approximate shape that in Frank's opinion was necessary in order to account for the properties of aether fluid. The aether is made of gyrons. Every cubic meter of vacuum contains on the order of 10^90 gyrons. Frank used pressure in the aether to designate the average effect of mutual gyron collisions.

Gyrons move and rotate in the void. Their movement is a consequence of their collisions. They do not change the nature of their movement between the collisions. That is, the linear velocity and angular momentum (rotation) are preserved between the impacts. The only way for a gyron to change its movement is to collide with another gyron. Between collisions, gyrons move in a straight line, while at the same time rotating around their center. They move through a three dimensional space which is a consequence of their three dimensional geometry. Since gyrons are completely described in three dimensions, the void they travel through may be measured using good old three dimensions we are all familiar with. No need for any imaginary additional dimensions.

How did they start moving? Why? Nobody knows at this point. Was there a big bang or some similar event that got them to move? We can certainly call such event a "big bang" but most likely there is nothing much to "bang" about it since nobody really knows how it all happened and why. The big bang that cosmologists are talking about these days actually never happened in a way they postulate. Moreover, Frank found explanation for the so called Cosmological redshift which prompted cosmologists to think about a possibility of big bang. It turned out it had nothing to do with the supposed expansion of the Universe. The Universe is not expanding. It is simply infinite. So, we do not have to worry about getting crushed back into a singular dot of infinite energy some billions and billions of years from now when the Universe would supposedly shrink back just so it could explode into another big bang. (can you believe those people?!?!?)

Time. What is it?

Time is not the fourth dimension. Time is simply a consequence of gyron motion. Without motion there would be no time. No time to observe and no time to measure. Time is coming out of the velocity of gyrons and their shape (length).

That is really the only serious thing one could say about time.

However, there are many silly things that could be said about it. Here's one:

The unfortunate consequence for Sci-Fi lovers is that there is no possibility of time travel in the Universe. You cannot go back or forth in time. No curved space-time continuum exists.

Gyrons and Aether in Frank's own words.

The following collection of quotes is from one of Frank's books. It provides more insight into how gyrons interact, how they form aether and eventually "fundamental" particles, i.e. electron and such.

(As Lucretius stated, they) Gyrons must be completely rigid objects that never wear out, and preserve motion after every mutual collision.

(they) Gyrons are all of equal size and shape. If the gyrons were not identical, then an accumulation of one variety in a given space would cause a change in the physical laws governing the substances composed of those gyrons.

Also, compared to their length, the gyrons must be slimmer than depicted above. Another issue regards the density with which the void is populated with gyrons. Except in some special circumstances, the gyron population density is (very low). To give you an idea of the rarity of gyrons in the void, assume that the gyrons were magnified in length to the size of a pencil. Then, according to my estimate, there would be one gyron moving through the void space the size of a twenty foot room. Nevertheless, because of their smallness, even this small ratio of occupation gives rise to very high population of gyrons in space.

On gyron collisions vs. collisions of the billiard balls, i.e. molecules:

No actual material, composed of molecules, is perfectly elastic. .. so that in every such collision there is a slight loss of speed.

This, however, must not be the case with gyrons. If there would occur the slightest loss in speed, then in the countless collisions in eternity, all the gyrons would lose their speed, and the universe would degenerate into a dead substance in which nothing would change. Clearly, this is not what we observe. Therefore, gyron collisions must indeed be perfect. Since the substance of which the gyrons are composed is completely rigid, there occurs no deformation in the collision process, and therefore, the speed (change) is instantaneous.

... the gyrons are not spherical in shape. This makes the mathematical description of the collisions process extremely difficult. In fact, so difficult that, to this day, nobody succeeded to formulate an approach that could precisely account for a process in which are involved multiple collisions among a population of gyrons. Although this limits the rigor of the theory, it does not preclude valid qualitative, and semi-quantitative derivations of the consequences of this collisions process. This is so because, on a large scale, we are more interested in the statistical averages than precise individual details. In physics, we attribute the imprecisions in description to fundamental statistical fluctuations, termed Heisenberg uncertainties.

We encounter a similar situation in the description of material fluids. Although the great Austrian physicist Boltzmann, and the famous Scottish theoretician Maxwell, were able to relate some phenomena of fluids to a collision process involving spherical molecules, a rigorous complete theory is still lacking. It is still not possible to predict theoretically either boiling, or condensation of water, and much less the formation of the endless variety of its crystallization into snow-flakes. However, in some ways, in spite of the complex shape, the gyrons present a simpler system because they are truly fundamental, not being dynamic compositions, like the material substances on a larger scale.

On the gyron shape, waves, and material particles:

A sphere, or any shape, such as a cucumber, that is rounded everywhere towards the outside, is termed convex. Therefore, the gyron, with the inward curvature along its length, and outward curvature at its ends, can be termed semi-concave. In all collisions between convex objects there occurs a dispersion of their velocity, that is, their speed and direction of motion is scattered. When a billiard ball strikes a group of balls at rest, the balls are always dispersed in various directions, they never gather together again. Similarly, as the air molecules are colliding, their original velocity is changing, and is eventually dissipated. In fluids, this phenomenon is called viscosity.

In the aether, however, under certain circumstances, viscosity can be eliminated, so that aether can behave as an inviscid or perfect fluid in which an organized motion never stops to exist. In the vacuum, where the gyrons are undergoing random collisions, the aether is viscous, nevertheless, if a group of gyrons is arranged in certain configurations of organized motion, then no dispersion of velocity occurs, and such dynamic configurations can persist indefinitely. There exist two types of organized motions of gyrons, namely in waves, and in vortices. In waves the organization is propagated with a constant speed, while in vortices, the organization rotates in some closed circular pattern.

We observe similar phenomena in the air, where the waves are called sound, and the vortices are called tornadoes and hurricanes. Because the air is not a perfect inviscid fluid, both the sound, and tornadoes are dissipated. In certain material fluids, where no velocity dispersion takes place, as in liquid helium at low temperature, the inviscid condition is maintained, and vortices in it do persist indefinitely. A similar phenomenon is involved in what is termed electrical superconductivity. Thus, since the absence of velocity dispersion is a prerequisite for the permanency of waves and vortices, it is necessary to explain how velocity dispersion in the collision process can be prevented.

As stated above, all convex particles cause velocity dispersion, and, therefore, constitute viscous fluids. The only alternative is a semi-concave shape of the sort depicted earlier. It remains to be explained how the gyrons can produce inviscid conditions in the aether. They gyrons are constantly colliding with each other, but what happens in these collisions is greatly dependent on their shape.

... collisions from convex surfaces result in dispersion of particles, while the rebounding from a concave surface causes particle concentration, or a focusing effect.

On this seemingly trivial difference depends the whole material existence of the universe. If the gyrons were only convex, then, in the repeated collisions, by being dispersed, all of them would tend to occupy the maximum space, and would also tend to equalize their speed. This is actually happening in the space that we call vacuum. In the vacuum the gyrons are not organized in any collective motion, and are colliding randomly without preserving any pattern of motion. However, if a group of gyrons is organized in a specific stable pattern, which prevents dispersion in the collision process, then such a pattern can persist indefinitely.

As the reader has probably surmised by now, these organized motion patterns are termed photons, and electrons, including various other material structures, currently termed "fundamental particles."

Consequently, what the present physics considers to be fundamental particles, are in reality merely various dynamic states in the aether preserved by the semi-concave gyrons. All the actual, and imagined particles, investigated by the present physics establishment, are analogous to tornadoes and hurricanes in the air. They are not fundamental, and they are not particles.

At this point we should be able to see the difference between the luminiferous ether and Frank's model of Aether fluid. Frank's model assumes that everything that exists is actually made out of aether fluid. The old model was only limited to enabling propagation of electromagnetic waves (e.g. light). That model was assuming that the ether and the matter were different and that were not made of the same ingredients. It was also assuming that the two had different properties and were governed by different Laws. The model developed by Frank can actually be used to explain why the famous Michelson-Morley experiment failed as it was already pointed out by the FitzGerald–Lorentz contraction back in 1889 and 1892. The difference is that the way Frank constructed his model of Aether is different from those old models used by previous scientists and therefore cannot be so easily discarded as it was done with all luminiferous models by Einstein in 1905.

On matter and anti-matter:

The absurdity of the (currently accepted theoretical) concepts is even clear without resorting to the mechanistic explanation involving gyrons. Namely, it is well known that matter can exist in mirror-symmetric configurations, such as electron and positrons, commonly termed anti-matter. It was also established that, if united, matter and anti-matter, are converted into energy in various forms. This process is called "annihilation of matter," which is also nonsense, because nothing is annihilated in the universe. How could a fundamental thing get annihilated? The whole universe would then vanish.

What really happens is that, due to the fact that matter and anti-matter represent opposite rotations in the aether, the rotations cancel, and the given motion of gyrons is converted into some other motion pattern. We say that energy and momentum are conserved in this process, but the current physics does not explain what either of these terms actually stand for.

Gravity

Frank's explanation of Gravity is actually very simple and elegant. As it will be shown below, Gravity comes out of the group trajectories of gyrons within the material particles like electron. From the trajectories of gyrons in photon it would become obvious why photon and "wave" particles do not create Gravity. What was amazing to me was the fact that those trajectories came straight out of Maxwell field equations and Frank's analysis of scalar and vector potential. He related these potentials to the gyron density in aether. As a consequence the gyron trajectories have been calculated and the electron and photon structures were revealed straight out of the math.

The Gravity came out as a result of gyrons escaping the electron and similar material particles. They would actually escape at the speeds much higher than the speed of light. Today, physicists call these gyrons that are escaping from the material particles the neutrinos. As the density of gyrons within the material particle decreases due to some number of them escaping, the drop in pressure within aether is created. Subsequently, the randomly moving gyrons outside of the material particle would "drift" inside. To the outside observer, this difference in pressure would be sensed as a force. That force we call the Gravitational Force. Very simple. In short, the Gravity is a consequence of gyrons being propelled out of the material particles at very high speeds and in the process creating the drop in pressure which brings new gyrons to enter the particle's dynamic structure from the surrounding aether fluid. At the same time, this provides the explanation of why and how would gravitational interaction propagate at the speeds that exceed the speed of light as previously determined by Laplace and conveniently ignored by most physicists.

From "What keeps us on the Ground? Gravitation Explained" by Frank M. Meno, pg. 13-16:

..., I claim that all materials, which are compositions of these moving gyrons, are constantly shooting out a certain number of their gyrons. How this works will be explained later, but just assume that this is so.

Clearly, if the material is depriving itself of the very substance of which it is composed, then with time, the material substance would have to vanish. However, this does not happen. How then can a material, send out a constant stream of particles, and never get dissipated?

My theory of gravitation, and material existence in general, is based on the answer to the above question, and although the solution is almost trivial, it has eluded all the thinkers so far. Newton came extremely close, but surprisingly did not think of the obvious. The answer is that a stream of particles equal in number, but reversed in direction, must flow back into every material. Yes, this represents a circulation of gyrons out, and in, of all matter.

Some of you probably concluded at this point that you wasted your money by buying this book: "The guy does not seem to be capable of elementary reasoning! An equal flow of anything in opposite direction cancels out to no flow. End of the theory!" Well, not quite. We usually assume that a flowing substance has the same property regardless of the direction of the flow, but this is only true if the particles comprising the flowing substance have a round shape. This is nearly so for most substances we are familiar with, because the molecules and atoms comprising them are nearly spherical.

Now visualize that the gyrons are not spherical particles, like marbles, but are instead very oblong, sort of like needles. This completely changes the behavior of a flow. You can visualize that if these needles move lenghtwise, they can flow very easily a long distance without getting entangled, while if they move sideways, they will soon bounce into each other and change the direction of their flow.

... [it takes time to get used to this idea] because the substance composed of the moving gyrons is unlike any substance we encounter on our scale. [...] Aether, being a fluid comprised of nonspherical particles, has anisotropic properties. This means that the properties of this fluid depend on the direction in which its particles are oriented. The universe is filled with the aether, and whatever is observed in it, is merely a consequence of its anisotropic behavior. It was necessary to stray from the topic of gravitation to be able to visualize how aether flow can produce the phenomenon that we call gravity.

Coming back to the necessary counter-flow of gyrons that sustains gravitation: The gyrons moving out of any substance are oriented lengthwise, and travel with an enormous speed, far exceeding the speed of light, while the gyrons flowing back into the substance are drifting sideways at a much lower speed. Nevertheless, at any instant of time the same number of gyrons is entering the substance as is leaving it, and therefore, the substance does not dissipate itself. Once established, this represents a perpetual circulation in the flow of the aether. [...]

As the gyrons are shot out of the material substance, their number in the substance is decreased, and this decreased condition causes the surrounding gyrons to move in to equalize the deficit. The difference in the number of gyrons in the aether surrounding the material, and inside the material, is termed their density gradient. A gradient in general designates a gradation of some property, in this case it is describing the difference in the number of gyrons closer and farther from the substance. Remember, since the gyrons are shooting out in all directions, their number per unit volume of space, termed their numerical density, is changing proportionally to the square of the distance from the material substance. Thus, the gradient of gyron density is proportional to the inverse square of the distance from the center of the material substance.

It is remarkable that Newton proposed this as the cause of gravitation, but could not explain what produces this gradient, and therefore he never claimed that he knew the cause of gravity. Here is how Newton described the density gradient concept:

Is not this Medium (Aether) much rarer within the dense Bodies of the Sun, Stars, Planets and Comets, than in the empty celestial Spaces between them? And is passing from them to great distances, doth it not grow denser and denser perpetually, and thereby cause the gravity of those great Bodies towards one another, and of their parts towards the Bodies; every Body endeavouring to go from the denser parts of the medium towards the rarer? For if this Medium be rarer within the Sun's Body than at its Surface, and rarer there than at the hundredth part of an Inch from its Body, and rarer there than at the Orb of Saturn; I see no reason why the Increase of density should stop any where, and not rather be continued through all distances from the Sun to Saturn, and beyond. And though this Increase of density may at great distances be exceeding slow, yet if the elastick force of this Medium be exceeding great, it may suffice to impel Bodies from the denser parts of the Medium towards the rarer, with all that power which we call Gravity.

This is precisely what is happening, only Newton did not think of the possibility that the particles of the aether are not spherical, and therefore could not explain the reason for the existence of the density gradient.

On the Speed of Light and Propagation of Gravity

Frank pointed out that the great French mathematician and scientist Pierre-Simon Laplace (1749-1827), has estimated that gravitation must propagate at least 200 million times faster than the speed of light in order for the solar system to function the way it does. Einstein apparently did not know about the work done by Laplace, and based his theory on the concept that gravity propagates with the speed of light. To this day, students are indoctrinated that nothing can propagate faster than the speed of light, while for practical reasons, the astronomers and engineers are employing Newton's formula which assumes an infinite speed of gravitational propagation.

Electron

The most elegant part of Dr. Meno's theory is given by the structure of electron. One day he came to our office in Scaife Hall at the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine and asked me if I could plot for him some parametric equations in MATLAB. I asked him what it was. He simply said, the electron. Actually, the streamlines of aether within the dynamic structure we call electron. While waiting for a printer to produce the plot, he explained to me how electron generates Gravity.

How does Electron generate Gravity?

Two electrons showing the streamlines of the aether fluid populated by colliding gyrons.

The picture looked like an infinity symbol rotated around the central vertical axis. It had a shape of a doughnut without the hole in the middle. The streamlines were groups of colliding gyrons within the aether fluid. They were kept within this vortex by the pressure of the surrounding aether. The only difference between the aether within the electron and the surrounding space was the density. The density inside the electron was considerably lower compared to that of the surrounding "vacuum". From time to time some individual gyrons would be kicked out from various places along the streamlines just to be replaced by the gyrons in the surrounding space. The most interesting process was happening at the center of the electron "doughnut". The space there was very tight since all streamlines had to pass through a single point at the center. As a consequence of increased collisions at the center some number of gyrons would be expelled from there longitudinally at extremely high speeds much higher than the speed of light. Over time this would create a drop in density within the electron vortex. The following is the first important thing to note about it:

The drop in gyron density within the electron vortex would generate density gradient. Subsequently, this would result in the motion of gyrons in surrounding space toward the vortex. Those gyrons would be captured into the streamlines and would become the integral part of electron (until they would be kicked out or expelled in a previously described fashion.)

This process would repeat over and over again. The motion of gyrons toward the electron vortex would appear as if it was induced by some magical force. That force we call the Force of Gravity. The electron vortex would act as a generator of the Gravitational Force.

This was the first time in my life that I was able to really understand how a force would be created, what would generate it, and why it would appear to us as acting on a distance. I could see why Newton, Faraday, and others were so puzzled by the observations of forces that could not be explained, and whose origins could not be traced back to anything material.

The second important observation we should make about this gravity generating electron-doughnut structure are the longitudinally propelled gyrons that would escape the vortex faster than light. Due to their extremely high speed and the fact that they would travel longitudinally, they would not be likely to collide with any other gyrons for very long time. By the time of the first collision they would have traveled very, very far. Frank related this phenomena to the Gaussian drop in gravitational force over large distances and the limitation in the size of Galaxies.

In his own words:

Since the vortex must maintain equilibrium in its dynamics, the escaped gyrons must be replaced with an inward drift of nearby gyrons. This process is producing the observed gravitational force field which is the result of the aether drift towards the center of the vortex. The vortices are nearly transparent to the escaping gyrons, and therefore, like neutrinos, exert only minute reverse force. However, neither gravitation, nor neutrino fluxes have an infinite range. Thus, in contrast to the current view, gravity does not decrease merely geometrically with the inverse square, but is also diminished with a Gaussian function on account of the finite diffusion distance of the escaping gyrons, resulting in an acceleration field of the form


According to Newton's formula for stable orbits


the above field fails to support orbiting for distances given by r>=RG, which can account for the fact that galaxies are limited in size to radii of about 50 thousand light years. If gravity were not limited this way, the inverse square law would not prevent an indefinite increase in the size of galaxies.

Funny thing about the vortex structure Dr. Meno found was the fact that he obtained the parametric equations of the streamlines directly from the Maxwell's field equations by postulating the form of the vector potential based on his understanding of aether fluid dynamics. He actually used the original form of the Maxwell equations. The same form Nikola Tesla used to create his nonlinear oscillator-shuttle-circuit (OSC) which upon closer observation was found to create local and short term violations of the Second Law of Thermodynamics, i.e. the OSC taps into the Zero Point Energy of the vacuum. Unfortunately, Tesla either did not publish the continuation of this work or his notes were destroyed after the Wardenclyffe tower was demolished in 1917. Some conspiracy theorists believe the notes describing Tesla's free energy generator were "stolen" after his death. At this point it would make sense to quote Tesla regarding his position on vacuum and aether:

Throughout space there is energy. Is this energy static or kinetic! If static our hopes are in vain; if kinetic — and this we know it is, for certain — then it is a mere question of time when men will succeed in attaching their machinery to the very wheelwork of nature.

The mind boggling consequence of the electron structure described here is that every individual gyron within an electron would be exchanged by the gyrons in the surrounding space after some finite period of time that may not be too long. Similarly, every single gyron in our bodies, i.e. inside the atoms and molecules of our bodies, would be exchanged without us ever noticing that anything peculiar was happening or that such a violent process might be occurring. The electrons, atoms, molecules, our bodies, and everything else in the Universe are nothing else but the dynamic modulations of the aether fluid that permeates the Space.

The speed of the aether drift that causes gravity, termed escape velocity, can be computed from the observed gravitational acceleration. In one of the papers, Frank neglected the far-field effect due to the Gaussian function for the sake of simplicity and clarity, but this did not substantially alter the result.

The aether flows into every mass with this speed, carrying with it, or exerting force on any other mass and waves located in this stream. The term "escape velocity" is suitable in the sense that in order to resist the flow, an object has to move faster in the opposite direction than the speed of the stream in which it is located. This speed can only increase to the speed of light which represents the rms speed of the gyrons. Therefore, by equating the gravity drift speed with the speed of light, one obtains the Schwarzschild radius.

The bending of light in gravitational fields is accounted for by the fact that the medium in which light propagates is deflecting it from a straight line in the direction of the vector sum formed by the wave propagation and aether drift, which also explains the blue and red Doppler shift in color, depending whether the light is moving along the drift velocity, or in the opposite direction.

The proposed model also takes care of the objection to general relativity for postulating field propagation with the speed of light, which was already shown by Laplace to be untenable in view of the stability of the solar system. As previously mentioned, Laplace determined that for the required planetary orbiting stability, the gravitational field must propagate in excess of 200 million times faster than the speed of light. The fast ejected gyrons do meet this criterion.

Clearly, when talking about Electron, one cannot avoid the concept of Gravity. They are closely coupled as it can be seen. This should not be surprising given that the Electron is the smallest (stable) material particle in the Universe.

Mass and Energy

Now we may be able to understand why it made sense for Einstein to think about making connection between the mass and energy. The mass really does not exist. What we call mass is just a state of energy that gives us the appearance of something more or less solid depending on the state of aggregation. The energy is captured by the motion of gyrons within the aether fluid. According to Dr. Meno's theory this must be the case since the only substance that exists within the Void of the Universe is the gyron. Lots of them! That is how we started this discussion:

The Void, the Gyrons, and their Motion.

The only place where mass would be considered in Frank's theory is the very small inertial mass that every gyron has. Here we would finally see the difference between the pure inertial mass and the gravitational mass. Since all gyrons are exactly the same and they have exactly the same inertial mass, their motion may be analyzed using kinematics because the mass would cancel out of the collision and equilibrium equations.

(to be continued...)

Photon

Why photon cannot generate Gravity?

Cosmological redshift explained 

Legacy