Electron: 4 – Quantum Electronics

A History Of Electrical/Electronic Discoveries Before The Electron

thomson_electron

We are informed by the highest authority that our modern technology is all thanks to the electron and quantum physics. But the electrical discoveries and developments listed below were all complete before the 1897 electron, another 30 plus years before the quantum became the consensus. They were achieved without the use or even a mention of a single electron nor any quantum electronics:

amps|volts|resistance|ohms|capacitors|resistors|coils and transformers| battery|electric telegraph|electromagnet|AC generator|AC induction motor|DC generator|DC motor|Microphone|incandescent lamp|phonograph|transatlantic telegraph cable|telephone|electric relay|radio (wireless) transmissions|street lighting|piezoelectricity|cathode ray tube|oscilloscope|power stations|hydroelectric plant|x rays|logic gate circuits| James Clerk Maxwell’s four equations|
All BEFORE the Electron was discovered
Wiki: 1897 J.J. Thomson’s discovery of the electron

The list above is from the Wikipedia page ‘Timeline of electrical and electronic engineering’ an admission in plain sight that the electron was unnecessary for the development of electronics.

∗None of the early electrical inventors/pioneers attached any importance to what we now call the electron.

∗ The electron was then and still is unnecessary for electrical engineering.

∗All of the electronic technology we use today (with one or two  apparent exceptions we will cover below) was in place before the discovery of the electron, none of it is thanks to particle or quantum physics. This can be verified by doing a little honest research.

∗JJ Thomson could not have discovered the electron without using what we now call electronics. This is only one of the many paradoxes of modern science.

∗No new technology has arisen as a direct result of the electron discovery, it has served only as a constraint and a diversion from true electrical research.

∗The history of science has been corrupted beyond recognition by science itself, everything is broken and we will try to piece some of it back together.

nobelprize.org:“The Nobel Prize in Physics 1906 was awarded to Joseph John Thomson “in recognition of the great merits of his theoretical and experimental investigations on the conduction of electricity by gases.
https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/1906/summary/

Thomson’s Nobel prize was not awarded for his electron discovery.

Nature @ nature.com has other ideas: “When the British physicist J. J. Thomson won the Nobel Prize in 1906 for his discovery of the electron, he proposed a toast at a celebratory dinner reception: “To the electron – may it never be of any use to anybody.” He was proudly defending the then “obvious fact” that the electron was a discovery with no application, a “basic” type of research. A century later, not only does the electron have wide-ranging uses in our lives (from electronics to medicine), but its yearly “market value” is more than three trillion US dollars.” 
https://www.natureasia.com/en/nmiddleeast/article/10.1038/nmiddleeast.2012.52

Not even Nature journal is immune from scientific presentism, revisionism and fallacy when it ascribes all the discoveries made before the electron discovery  being as a result of it’s later discovery – can it be time travel or is it just that revisionism has become the norm, the scientific custom and practice that fills the pages of the scientific press? We need to ask why science has a need to lie about it’s achievements. The article continues, calling Michael Faraday a physicist, something that would never be attributed to an amateur physicist in today’s scientific climate. The temporal and mental contortions, the twists and the turns that science employs to justify its existence.

How does a top scientific journal such as Nature manage to hand-wave away the aether physics of J.J. Thomson and his book “Electricity and Matter” published in 1908 long after his electron “discovery” ? :

powerofaether.com: “Thomson came up with the dynamics of Faraday’s Lines of Force, which he called Tubes of Electric Induction and this became an engineerable manifestation of the aether … His most important concept is that the aether is the storehouse of momentum. This means that when the aether is electrified, it exhibits the properties of a substance with inertia and momentum that acts upon physical matter. This leads to an understanding that matter in and of itself is an accretion of the aether. Thomson shows that the aether is a substance that is directly engineerable both mathematically and in concrete form and that there is a direct equivelancy between aether and matter.” http://powerofaether.com/

Compare to the theory of Nikola Tesla: “Long ago [I] recognised that all perceptible matter comes from a primary substance, of a tenuity beyond conception and filling all space – the Akasa or luminiferous ether – which is acted upon by the life-giving Prana or creative force, calling into existence, in never ending cycles, all things and phenomena. The primary substance, thrown into infinitesimal whirls of prodigious velocity, becomes gross matter; the force subsiding, the motion ceases and matter disappears, reverting to the primary substance.” Nikola Tesla, 7/6/1930; J. Ratzlaff, (Ed.), Solutions to Tesla’s Secrets, Milbrae, CA: Tesla Book Company, 1981, p. 91.
Source:https://www.newdawnmagazine.com/articles/tesla-vs-einstein-the-ether-the-birth-of-the-new-physics

Thomson’s science was so far removed from what we are told he did, that the modern version of events is an outrageous insult to him and the rest of us. So deeply embedded in the psyche of our culture is the idea that the electron drives our modern technology that it is an assumption that is rarely if ever questioned. But the energy that drives your TV, computer and other household appliances remains unexplored and unacknowledged by science; although some scientists will sometimes admit to some of the truth of this statement. Electricity is not electrons and the only reason we think it is, is because our science dominated education brainwashed us into thinking that way. You think you’re not brainwashed – think again!

The electron was the first sub-atomic particle to be discovered and it gave rise to particle physics. This is why it is so important to the empire of science – science controls our education and education determines the way we think. It is also important to the financial status quo that funds science ensuring that no real progress is made that may prejudice the income and power. The reason science is able to get away with this deception is because all real research into how electricity works was aborted at the time of the discovery of the electron some hundred plus years ago.

history.aip.org: tells us quite confidently that: “Modern ideas and technologies based on the electron, leading to television and the computer and much else, evolved through many difficult steps. Thomson’s careful experiments and adventurous hypotheses were followed by crucial experimental and theoretical work by many others in the United Kingdom, Germany, France and elsewhere. These physicists opened for us a new perspective–a view from inside the atom.” https://history.aip.org/history/exhibits/electron/jjhome.htm

If a cathode ray (TV) tube was used to discover the electron, how could the discovery of the electron lead to TV? Karl Ferdinand Braun had already invented the cathode ray oscilloscope in the same year as the electron discovery, only a step away from a TV set.
The physicists of the day (and even now) had no interest in entertainment technology and were not looking to make the cathode ray tube into a TV set. They were interested in building a new science of particle physics, period.

Interesting

Nobel prizwinner George Paget Thomson was the son of Nobel prizwinner J J Thomson who introduced particle physics. His son George reverted back to a wave nature of  the electron and for his pains received yet another Nobel prize for the family album.

nobelprize.org: “In the beginning of the 19th century, quantum physics evolved from the idea that energy is conveyed in only certain fixed amounts. An early finding indicated that light can be regarded as both waves and particles. Later it was proposed that matter, such as electrons, also can be described as both waves and particles. In 1927 G.P. Thomson and Clinton Davisson demonstrated, independently of one another, that electrons could be described as waves.” https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/1937/thomson/facts/

spectrum
If an electron can be regarded as a wave what is the wavelength of an electron wave passing through a conductor? We have an electromagnetic spectrum with no place designated for an electron wave frequency.

Quantum Theory

There are those who claim that the transistor and by default the computer is with us thanks to quantum theory. But quantum theory was still curled-up in the warm womb of academia when the transistor came into being.

Quantum Electronics

quantum_bookWiki: “Quantum electronics is a term that was used mainly between the 1950s and 1970s to denote the area of physics dealing with the effects of quantum mechanics on the behavior of electrons in matter, together with their interactions with photons. Today, it is rarely considered a sub-field in its own right, and it has been absorbed by other fields. Solid state physics regularly takes quantum mechanics into account, and is usually concerned with electrons. Specific applications of quantum mechanics in electronics is researched within semiconductor physics. The term also encompassed the basic processes of laser operation, which is today studied as a topic in quantum optics. Usage of the term overlapped early work on the quantum Hall effect and quantum cellular automata.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_optics

The Old Quantum Theory

wikipedia.org: The old quantum theory is a collection of results from the years 1900–1925 which predate modern quantum mechanics. The theory was never complete or self-consistent, but was rather a set of heuristic corrections to classical mechanics. The theory is now understood as the semi-classical approximation to modern quantum mechanics. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_quantum_theory

Quantum Mechanics

wikipedia.org: By 1930, quantum mechanics had been further unified and formalized by the work of David Hilbert, Paul Dirac and John von Neumann with greater emphasis on measurement, the statistical nature of our knowledge of reality, and philosophical speculation about the ‘observer’. It has since permeated many disciplines, including quantum chemistry, quantum electronics, quantum optics, and quantum information science.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_mechanics#History

liesSo, as we can see there was no quantum mechanics until after 1930 and little interest in quantum electronics until the 1950’s. The 1930’s decade keeps-on cropping up ever since I started to write these pages. The 1930’s was a watershed, a time when science finally lost the plot and completely stopped producing theories that would lead to engineerable technology. Find something and make me look foolish, because I can’t find anything.

Below from the same Wiki list of electronic technologies from the time of the introduction of the electron to the time of the introduction of quantum mechanics:

Diode and triode vacuum tubes|FET transistor|transatlantic radio transmissions|video camera tube|television broadcasts|superconductivity|

It’s interesting to note that the discovery of the transistor and superconductivity are not associated with quantum mechanics.

The idea of a computer has been with us throughout history with each step waiting for improved technology. Binary numbers have been with us since the ancient Egyptians, Boolean algebra in 1837 and logic gate circuits have been around since 1898.
See  Computers 3: History: The Early Days

Today all of our electronic technology is a miniaturised development of the old technology listed above most of which was based on the old and pseudo-debunked aether theory. 
Aether theory obviously works for electronics whilst the electron theory does not.

Transistors Before Quantum Electronics

sparkbangbuzz.com: ‘Wireless World and Radio Review’ October 1, 1924 and October 8, 1924 entitled “The Crystal As A Generator And Amplifier” by Victor Gabel. The article also includes several regenerative receiver circuits that utilize negative resistance device for both RF amplification and detection.” http://www.sparkbangbuzz.com/els/znrfamp2-el.htm

Wiki: Julius Edgar Lilienfeld’s “Patent, US 1745175 “Method and apparatus for controlling electric current” first filed in Canada on 22.10.1925, describing a device similar to a MESFET also US 1900018 “Device for controlling electric current”. Filed on 28.03.1928, a thin film MOSFET, US 1877140. And an amplifier for electric currents filed on 08.12.1928, a solid state device where the current flow is controlled by a porous metal layer, a solid state version of the vacuum tube.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_Edgar_Lilienfeld

porticus.org: “…Its perfectly clear that Bell Labs didn’t invent the transistor, they re-invented it. The fact that they totally failed to acknowledged the pioneer work done by others can be explained by human nature, pride, arrogance, ignorance or plain self-interest. Its perfectly true that the world wasn’t ready for previous incarnations of the transistor but that was no reason for denying that Lilienfeld patented the original solid-state triode oscillator/amplifier well before others claimed all the credit. But thats life; it was not the first time and doubtless not the last.”
http://www.porticus.org/bell/belllabs_transistor1.html

See my page Transistor: Undeserved Nobel Prizes

Also see my page on Computer early history

We live in a world full of lies.

diggingdog
The Digging Dog

16 thoughts on “Electron: 4 – Quantum Electronics

  1. Did you come across the physicists Richard Muller?

    He claims he is a part of discovering dark energy?
    https://www.quora.com/Why-do-I-see-so-many-articles-where-scientists-that-are-observing-our-universe-do-not-understand-what-they-see-If-this-problem-is-happening-so-frequently-isnt-there-a-flaw-in-the-theory-that-is-being-used-to/answer/Richard-Muller-3

    He claims scientist s are those who tried to explore things they don’t understand. That’s why they are scientists.

    Well, then why most inventors are non-scientists? Unless you transfer a theory into something useful technology, how come you claim you really understand it?

    Dark energy don’t exists. It’s confusing part of aether.

    Like

    1. Scientists don’t understand because that’s the way it’s supposed to be. When none of us know what’s going-on then according to the CIA ‘they have done their job’. It’s all about dumbing-down and this starts with education sometimes leading to scientific education. All pre-planned to create a false reality. Leaders don’t want want to contend with smart people, it’s as simple as that.

      Like

      1. Of course not, he has allowed himself to become as stupid as the rest of the scientists. The answer has been there for a hundred years, the original pioneers knew about what he calls dark energy.
        As I said a few days ago, it’s about science and it’s abandonment of logic. Particles are not logical, nature does not have a bag of beads.

        Like

  2. Why Tesla was associated with invention of AC distribution while I see AC distribution was already exited before Tesla.

    Ferranti established practical AC power distribution before Tesla.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sebastian_Ziani_de_Ferranti

    But Eric Dollard says when other try to replicate Tesla’s AC stuff, they went into explosions. Hence Steinmetz was hired by GE to fix it.

    They why the prior developers of AC like Freeanti, Gallio etc didn’t run into explosions and manage to establish long distance AC transmission lines? What do you say?

    Like

    1. AC was certainly known before Tesla but it was his induction motor/generator that those who know about him call one of his greatest inventions. Also his poly-phase distribution system:
      “The AC polyphase system provided a more economical means of distributing electrical power, over that of DC power transmission. Polyphase systems utilized three or more energized electrical conductors that carry alternating currents having a definite time offset between the voltage waves in each conductor. It was found early on in its development that polyphase systems proved to be most effective for transmitting power to electric motors. ” https://ethw.org/Initial_Tesla_Polyphase_/_%22Three-Phase%22_Alternating-Current_Systems_and_Metering_Development
      I don’t know much about Ferranti.

      Like

      1. .
        But my question was why do so many engineers went in to explosion (including GE’s) when they try to replicate Tesla’s AC generator? Steinmet’z math solved those issues.
        .
        But Ferranti already establish AC distribution in small scale. Why his generators didn’t explode then? He already knew AC math before and never published or what?
        .
        Something confusing.

        Liked by 1 person

  3. I don’t understand when physicists say that we don’t need aether. It is unnecessary.
    .
    So what exactly the reason for saying aether as unnecessary and electrons as necessary is still not clear.

    Like

    1. During Einstein’s time physics was in trouble. All the work involving aether was being done by non-physicists. These pioneers had proven it’s existence over and again. There came a time while meeting together sometime around 1900, they all agreed it would be a simple thing to synthesise electricity for free. This is when the door was shut tight by, I would guess those who made money from electricity distribution. The only one we know was stopped from working is Tesla, but I believe every scientist and researcher was threatened at this time.
      JJ Thomson was working with aether and came-up with the electron. This is why we have such a mess and why physicists don’t work with electricity. It’s all so complex now that it makes your head spin.
      Particles are illogical but science does not use logic any more.

      Like

      1. Yes. I know. I simply shared my frustration after knowing science is no longer science.

        Physicists say electricity is a “branch” of physics and quantum mechanics is all about deeper aspects of electricity only. Now we know more about electricity than Tesla etc.

        Anyhow, it’s good joke.

        Like

  4. I came across this fanatic mainstream idiot named goodmath.

    He debunk everything which violated mainstream religious belief.

    See his anti-aetheric post.
    https://scienceblogs.com/goodmath/2007/02/26/the-jackpot-of-crankery-woo-ph-1

    All his posts are like that.
    https://scienceblogs.com/goodmath

    He used the term Woo to outcast critical thinkers. But he himself support relativity which is (Woo)∞.

    Sometimes I believe these people are being heavily paid and given wider views in common social platform to maintain the indoctrination of mainstream hogwash to keep everyone sway from free energy. For them free energy is a Woo.

    Like

    1. The Jackpot of Crankery: Woo Physics, Woo Medicine, Woo Politics, and Woo Math

      It’s much easier to debunk than to do something useful and ‘WOO’ typifies the debunker. Woo math is what physicists use.
      I wouldn’t be surprised if some do get paid and that others do it for nothing.

      Like

  5. You may enjoy the answers to this question regarding mass and energy.
    https://www.quora.com/How-can-photons-have-no-mass-and-yet-still-have-energy-given-that-E-mc-2

    The questioner is more logical than the answers. But the physicists try to prove that the questioner don’t understand physics.

    First there is no such BS as photon. Rest mass, relativistic mass are beyond stupidity. If rest mass is zero, then it don’t exists. Every cannot be conceived without mass. But they ditched aether, so they have to do such mathematical gymnastics to convince the masses(aka fools).

    E=mc^2 is another mathemagic. It’s a numerology and false. energy is a function of mass. No mass, no energy. It’s like saying body is converted to mind.

    Initially I got excited to reply there. But later realized that, hey, in a crowd of delusioned ones, who wan’t to wake up? So why waste time? Every became expert in answering this question by parroting their academics, but nobody ever logically thing the action question being asked.

    Anyhow, it’s Einstein’s creation. Can it be wrong? No.
    Can we question? No.
    It it science? Yes.

    Logic is dumped down long way back by these so-called physicists. Logic is ONLY used today in computer programming, that’s why they works.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. “But, is it for real? In physics, we don’t really care about if something is real or not. As long as it agrees with experiment, it could be in the form of whatever it needs to be, we would say it’s useful.”
      So something not real is useful?
      For experiment read math.
      E=MC2 is a stab at the propagation speed of light in the aether. It’s not a speed.

      Like

      1. When they say “In physics, we don’t really care about if something is real or not”, they clarifies that physicists have no connection with reality.

        Physicists don’t care something is real or not, but they are too sure that aether don’t exists.

        Can an engineer give such statement that in engineering we don’t care if something is real or not? I don’t think so.

        So this summaries that all physicists care is consensus and money.

        Like

      2. They are trying to argue that there is no cause and effect. As an engineer myself I do not expect gears to start turning in the opposite directions. It would be impossible to find a fault.

        Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.