Does an electron ‘particle’ exist? N.Tesla, O Heaviside, JC Maxwell & CP Steinmetz said NO!
C.P. Steinmetz explains electricity 04 Insanity of charged particles
With thanks to: https://www.reddit.com/r/neuronaut/comments/4dpt0c/does_an_electron_particle_exist_n_tesla_o/
Copy the link and paste into a browser
“In the theoretical treatment of these electrons we are faced with the difficulty that electro-dynamic theory by itself is unable to give an account of their nature.” “For since electrical masses constituting the electron would necessarily be scattered under the influence of their mutual repulsions, unless there are forces of another kind operating between them the nature of which has hitherto remained obscure to us.” – Einstein on electrons from “Relativity”, by Albert Einstein, Random House Publisher, 1916
Albert Einstein again: “I have now struggled with this basic problem of electricity for more than twenty years, and have become quite discouraged, though without being able to let go of it. I am convinced that a completely new and enlightening inspiration is needed.” Einstein explaining why physicists don’t like electricity and why astronomers call cosmic electricity magnetic fields.
Nikola Tesla November 1928 interview: “On the whole subject of matter, in fact, Dr. Tesla holds views that are startlingly original. He disagrees with the accepted atomic theory of matter, and does not believe in the existence of an “electron” as pictured by science.
“To account for its apparently small mass, science conceives of the electron as a hollow sphere, a sort of bubble, such a bubble could exist in a medium as a gas or liquid because its internal pressure is not altered by deformation. But if, as supposed, the internal pressure of an electron is due to the repulsion of electric masses, the slightest conceivable deformation must result in the destruction of the bubble! Just to mention another improbability…” – Nikola Tesla Article: “A Famous Prophet of Science Looks into the Future” (Popular Science Monthly)
“My ideas regarding the electron are at variance with those generally entertained. I hold that it is a relatively large entity carrying a surface charge and is not an elementary unit (particle). When the ‘electron’ leaves an electrode of high potential and in a high vacuum it carries an electrostatic charge many times greater than normal.” – N. Tesla
“To describe an electron as a negatively charged body is equivalent to saying that it is an expanding-contracting particle. (See Tesla above) There is no such condition in nature as a negative charge, nor are there negatively charged particles. Charge and discharge are opposite conditions, as filling and emptying, or compressing and expanding are opposite conditions.” – W. Russell
JJ Thomson developed the “Ether Atom” ideas of M. Faraday into his “Electronic Corpuscle”, this indivisible unit. One corpuscle terminates on one Faradic tube of force, and this quantifies as one Coulomb. This corpuscle is not an electron, it is a constituent of what today is known incorrectly as an “electron”. (Thomson relates 1000 corpuscles per electron) In this view, that taken by W. Crookes, J.J. Thomson, and N. Tesla, the cathode ray is not electrons, but in actuality corpuscles of the Ether.” – E. Dollard
Video 2015-03-30 Eric Dollard on J.J. Thomson
“There is no rest mass to an ‘electron’. It is given here the ‘electron’ is no more than a broken loose “hold fast” under the grip of the tensions within the dielectric lines of force. They are the broken ends of the split in half package of spaghetti. Obviously this reasoning is not welcome in the realm of Einstein’s Theory of Relativity.” – E. Dollard
“Unfortunately to a large extent in dealing with dielectric fields the prehistoric conception of the electro-static charge, the ‘electron’, on the conductor still exists, and by its use destroys the analogy between the two components of the electric field, the magnetic and dielectric. This makes the consideration of dielectric fields unnecessarily complicated” – C.P. Steinmetz (Electric Discharges, Waves and Impulses)
“The idea of electricity as a flow of ‘electrons’ in a conductor was regarded by Oliver Heaviside as “a psychosis”. This encouraged Heaviside to begin a series of writings
Also consider the J.J. Thomson concept of the “electron” (his own discovery). Thomson considered the electron the terminal end of one unit line of dielectric induction. “Electrons as a separate, distinct entity…doesn’t really exist, they are merely bumps in something called a ‘field’.” – Dr. Steve Biller
Einstein removed the thorn in the side of physics that was aether and this is the sole reason he was so popular with the administrators of science. Having removed the aether, he cancelled the speed of light in aether and made it the speed of light in a vacuum. In doing so he transferred all the properties of the aether to the vacuum that previously had no properties.
A vacuum cannot have properties or it is not a vacuum, hence the confusion we now have, a confusion that made Einstein into a genius and a hero.
The phrase ‘space/time’ has replaced the aether in an extremely materialistic science that claims everything is matter/energy. But time cannot be defined as matter/energy; time cannot be defined at all. We also have space that is assumed to be empty and so we have a medium space/time that cannot do anything or be anything tangible. Space/time is metaphysical and this is all rationalised by giving it the description – counterintuitive.
Merriam-Webster: counterintuitive: different from what you would expect : not agreeing with what seems right or natural .
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/counterintuitive
Counterintuitive in scientific parlance means that you need a scientist to explain it – the emperors new clothes. Science is not natural or a study of nature, as it claims to be, nature is modified to becomes what science wants it to be.
We all carry this baggage around thanks to an education that is totally controlled by science – everything in education has to be scientific. Now, it must have long ago occurred to educators that it did not matter that what was taught was a load of bunkum, as long as all the educators were reading from the same hymn book, as long as the examinations reflect the same excrement as taught. Education is a means of control, never intended to be the truth, as that would put the educated in control rather than the intended money and power-hungry oligarchs who provide funding for science…
The JJ Thomson group at Cavendish would gather for occasional relaxation and a booze-up. Thomson would call the scientists to order – ‘Gentlemen, a toast, “To the electron — may it never be of any use to anybody.” The group would raise their glasses and repeat “To the electron”. This may sound strange for a Nobel prizewinner who’s prize was (more or less) for the same electron.
Thomson was an aether-theory-man who never believed that the electron was a particle, but the seductive attraction of fame and fortune offered by a Nobel prize was enough to cause him to yield to conformity. The coming of the electron had caused an idealogical split between the physicists and the electrical engineers, a gulf that remains today. The amazing fact is that Thomson sided with the engineers – he was doing the same research as Tesla and Steinmetz, as is confirmed if you are able to find one of his books. It is this that in part accounts for the Einstein quotes above.
Notwithstanding, the cathode ray tube kick-started particle physics as a science with a particle that did not exist according to the top men of the day = N.Tesla, O Heaviside, JC Maxwell & CP Steinmetz, who said NO- and JJ Thomson who said NO, but changed his mind under pressure. None of the electrical pioneers, from Faraday to Tesla et al, ever used the word electron until Thomson’s ‘discovery’. The socket in the wall that we all take for granted is the work of the names above. All of our modern electrical technology can be traced back to these names and their contemporaries.
I have no idea of the identity of who it was, who was able to pull-off the electron scam, although I can clearly see why it was done. Tesla’s “free energy for the world” was an ideal shared by all the names above. Free explosive energy had manifest in the new electrical distribution systems and it was agreed by all the researchers that a controlled version was an engineering possibility. When Tesla’s Wardenclyffe funding was withdrawn it was also applied to all the scientists doing electrical research. It brought about an end to a golden age of technological innovation, to be replaced by Einstein, particles and what was known as New Physics. New physics knows nothing of electricity and is hostile to inventors of new electrical technology.
There are many people who can’t get their heads around this – they can’t envisage an electronics without an electron (back to education), but Thomson had all the electronic circuitry that we have today before he did his ‘electron discovery’ work. The electron was not required.
Go to Electron ‘particles’:3
alixus 