Dan,

I appreciate the level of tolerance you have shown so far. I can understand that anyone who is an expert in their field has every right to be short with a novitiate. However, while I may not be over skilled in presenting my theory in a mathematically acceptable form I am fairly accomplished when it comes to the written word. I therefore suggest that we do a brief recap of how the present situation arose. A few years ago I was just like anyone else; happy with the progress that science had made and willing to leave things in the hands of the scientists and carry on with my work.. Then I looked up light on the net, trying to imagine, at the same time, what wonderful advances must have been made in the understanding of light, since the same science had also produced personal computers, calculators and cell phones and had also enabled man to reach the moon. Imagine my surprise when I found that not a single site, not a university site, not a physics site, not an encyclopaeida site, was able to explain to me how light propagated. Or to put it simply the information on how light travelled from point A to point B was nowgere available.

This simple question, required it seemed a very complicated answer, wherein light actually undergoes disembodiment (is everywhere and nowhere at the same time) and also travels through multiple dimensions, can be in two places at once and so on. Here is what Max Born, the person who invented the concept of the wave-function has to say:

* “We have two possibilities. Either we use waves in space of more than three dimensions…..or we remain in three dimensional space, but give up the simple picture of the wave amplitude as an ordinary physical magnitude , and replace it with a purely mathematical concept into which we cannot enter.” Yet one has to wonder how something that can be ethically unacceptable in the ‘real’ world can be perfectly justifiable in the abstract ‘mathematical’ world. …. " Max Born *

From this point in time the wave function was treated as an abstract phenomenon, a wave of probability and not as something real. Unfortunately, the line between the abstract and the real all too often becomes blurred.

Therefore, as can be seen from the above quotation light as it travelled from A to B was not ‘real’ it travelled in multiple dimensions and so, on.

Historically, the reason for all these contrivances was that the aether, which would have explained all these properties of light could not be detected. Similarly, although man, was aware that an atmosphere existed, he was not able to identify what it was for at least two thousand years, in the same way although man suspected that the earth might be a spheroid shape he was not able to explain it for at least two thousand years. The fact that something had not been found does not mean that it could not be found.

I have given a very clear interpretation of what I think the aether is and the aether model I have put forward explains every property that light and electromagnetic radiation possess, it also explains, gravity, magnetism and superconductivity.

So when I write an equation (formula) that gives an explanation of how light travels from point A to point B what is so difficult to understand?

\(\displaystyle \displaystyle \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{\overset{\rightarrow}\gamma_e^\mathfrak{e} n^2}{n+1} \right)

\begin{Bmatrix} {\frac{\gamma_e^\mathfrak{e}n^2}{1} , \frac{\gamma_e^\mathfrak{e}n^2}{2} , \frac{\gamma_e^\mathfrak{e}n^2}{3} , \frac{\gamma_e^\mathfrak{e}n^2}{4} , \frac{\gamma_e^\mathfrak{e}n^2}{5} , \frac{\gamma_e^\mathfrak{e}n^2}{6} , \frac{\gamma_e^\mathfrak{e}n^2}{7} , \frac{\gamma_e^\mathfrak{e}n^2}{8} , \rightarrow \infty}\end{Bmatrix} =

\begin{Bmatrix} {\frac{\vec\gamma_e^\mathfrak{e}1}{1},\frac{\vec\gamma_e^\mathfrak{e}4}{2},\frac{\vec\gamma_e^\mathfrak{e}9}{3} ,\frac{\vec\gamma_e^\mathfrak{e}16}{4},\frac{\vec\gamma_e^\mathfrak{e}25}5},\frac{\vec\gamma_e^\mathfrak{e}36}{6},\frac{\vec\gamma_e^\mathfrak{e}49}{7},\frac{\vec\gamma_e^\mathfrak{e}64}{8},\vec\infty\end{Bmatrix}\)

The first set is the data set and the second set are the values that the data set yields. The bottom number shows the distance in meteres, the top figures show the number by which virtual photons are protomoted to real photons, which is unequivocally related to the manner in which light spreads out according to the square of the distance travelled.

The term for infinity is udes because the size of the Universe is both vast and uncertain. This formula raises two very intriguing possibilities. The first is that light can only travel for a limited distance, as proposed by most people who deal with luminance. This means that even if there is a continuous source of limited power, the amount of light would only be able to cover a limited distance. Which means that at the boudaries of this limit real photons would be boiling of the boundary and returning to the virtual state.

I realise with Voyager transmitting from distances of 25,000,000,000 km away, using jus a 400 watt maser, my theory might be a strectch, but it is nevertheless true. This is especially so as according to my theory, radio-waves have considerably less interaction with matter than optical frequencies. For instance if a radio-wave happened to meet an atom, the odds that it would be absorbed are from poor to next to nothing.