This fancy looking explanation leaves me with unanswered questions. Here are a few for your consideration.
First question: What laboratory experiment or natural observation can we perform, the result of which will allow us to differentiate between our existing standard scientific theories and the aether ("orgone"?) theory you present here?
Von Richenbach describes many observations in his work. Unfortunately they are under difficult conditions. Dan Davidson describes some experiments with a magnetometer that he did. These are what I'm trying to replicate right now.
Aetherometry has performed a whole series of experiments.
Here is something that is over looked in the lit.
A history of Anomalous (longitudinal) reaction forces in plasma
discharges.
"Anomalous cathode reaction forces varying in proportion to the square of the input current were first identified separately by Tanberg and Kobel, in 1930, during studies of cathode vaporization in "vacuum"-arc discharges (VADs) and stationary cathode spots (1,2)"
"In the 1940's, little work was done on the North-American continent on the presence of longitudinal forces in plasma discharges. The notable exceptions may have been the self-funded research of W. Reich and of T.H. Moray."
"Admission of longitudinal interactions has always been problematic for the relativistic law of Lorentz (11), as well as for the Bio-Savart treatments of Ampere's Law (12). Quantum treatments of (high) field-emission, such as the Fowler-Nordheim law (strong fields pull out electrons with low energies, ie Fermi electrons) (13), also did not take these interactions into account."
"Subsequent research in the 1950's concentrated mainly on the study of cathode and anode spots, as well as on cathode erosion by crater formation (14-15)."
"By the 1960's, it had become apparent that the presence of tremendous electrodynamic forces acting longitudinally in the direction of the discharge could not be accounted for by the Lorentz/Bio-Savart Law. Moreover, as Plyutto et al remarked, the Tanberg vaporization hypothesis also could not explain the observed dependence of cathode reaction forces on gas pressure,
nor the high velocity plasma streams emerging from the cathode (18)." Remark: Sound familiar? Like some solar phenomena??
"Since the 1980's, Aspden's theoretical framework has received recognition (49-53) and direct or indirect experimental confirmation (49-50, 54-55). In the mid-eighties, Prof. P. Graneau and his group showed that electrodynamic explosions induced by kilovolt pulsed ion discharges in pure water were greater by three to four orders of magnitude than expected by established theory (54-55)"
"In 1977, Aspden would file a British patent application (24) utilizing thermal conversion of the high anomalous acceleration of cathode-directed ions by electrons in VAD plasmas (25), but his circumstances did not permit him to pursue the work experimentally (26)."
In the 90's
"the emission-triggered Pulsed Abnormal Glow Discharge, or autogenous PAGD for short. The PAGD regime is an homeostatic structure (a fluctuating order) of cyclically recurring discontinuities"
"The autogenous PAGD regime deploys extraordinarily large cathode reaction forces, associated with the rebound of anomalously accelerated ions striking the cathode and the anomalous ion counterflow (vaporized cathode metal and gas ions) being swept forward by the emitted electronic flux."
(Sound like our sun?)
http://www.aetherometry.com/Labofex_Plasma_Physics/Archive/PwrfromAEemissions.html
Cold fusion now know as Low Energy Nuclear Reactions.
Steorn and their magnetic asymmetry anomaly.
There are many examples in the world around you and in the literature over the years. They just get ignored or explained away as an outlier.
Second question: We know that charged particles couple with both electric & magnetic fields, such that their state of motion is radically altered by the presence of such fields, as compared to the absence of such fields, and we know how to precisely predict the effect of the fields. We also know as a result of observation that photons do not couple to these fields as would charged particles, leading to the obvious conclusion that photons do not carry any net electric charge. How does the hypothesis that photons are "massfree charges" reconcile with the observation that photons are not only "mass free", but also "charge free"?
The photons are not mass free charges. They are emitted locally from a "globular space" around the electron/atom during an energy transfer process.
From Aetherometry.
<snip>
1.3. There are two types of photons: ionizing and nonionizing (blackbody). Aetherometry recognizes this accepted distinction, but suggests that it is a distinction still more profound than accepted physics itself holds, in that the two spectra are different as to the very conditions necessary for the production of one or the other type of photons.
Specifically, Aetherometry claims that nonionizing or blackbody photons are locally generated whenever material particles that act as charge-carriers decelerate. Thus photons mark the trail of deceleration of massbound particles. T
his punctual generation of photons that marks the trails of decelerating massbound charges, combined with the decay in the kinetic energy of these charges, their release and scattered reabsorption by other adjacent massbound charges (thus causing so called conversion of electromagnetic energy into longer wavelength radiation), is what accounts for (1) the dispersion of energy through conversion into electromagnetic radiation (and
Tesla's persistent claim that his power transmitters were not transmitters of electromagnetic radiation) and for (2) the approximate suitability of the stochastic model for the dispersion of a ray and the scatter of light.
<snip>
Furthermore, these new algebraic physical functions led aetherometric theory to claim that, likewise, the photon relation (E = m0 c2 = hυ) proposed by de Broglie has an equivalent that can be written as (E = λ0 c2 = hυ). This serves to highlight that, whereas the structure of electronic matter at a nanometric scale is electrical and forms a recognizable geometric object, a torus, the structure of a photon is what takes on the generic form of inertia, as per (λ0 c2 = hυ). Photons are the particles constituted by the structure c2, not elements of matter or electrons. The latter are only perceived as having an equivalent wave structure c2 when they are seized in their rest frame or their electromagnetic frame, or transformed into ionizing photons. But the structure of elements of matter while they remain such is electrical, described by the wave-product (Wk Wv), rather than c2. Hence, Aetherometry contends, the finite geometry of photons is globular, forming a quasi-sphere, and composed of two identical waves, whereas the finite geometry of electrons is toroidal and composed of two different waves, one truly electrical and the other truly magnetic. Accordingly, the waves of photons are only geometric product equivalents of the real electric and magnetic waves which compose either the rest mass of a material particle, or its kinetic energy. Therefore Aetherometry argues that photons do indeed possess two transverse fields, but the two fields or their vectors are organized such as to describe a local globularizing vortex, each relating a sine wave, and each wave being described by c in the fundamental derived or resultant relationship (E = m0 c2 = hυ).
Accordingly, Aetherometry explicitly argues that photons do not really have electrical or magnetic fields; this is in accordance with the fact that photons do not present electrical charge and that thus one does not mistake them for electrons! What possesses electrical and magnetic fields are charges, whether massfree or massbound. The latter, furthermore, possess such fields as are associated with their rest energy and also with the energy of their motion.
2.2. In accordance with the preceding, Aetherometry claims that solar radiation is electrical, not because it is composed of photons, but because it consists of propagating massfree charges. Unlike massbound charges, massfree charges have no fixed spin orientation with respect to forward propagation. They can be thought of as net spin 0 charges. But at any time, they may have an effective spin that is either -1/2 or +1/2 (actually, -1 and +1, as spin, in Aetherometry, is a number property of angular momentum, not of the number of 'hyperdimensions' attributed to states of polarization, as it is in Quantum Electrodynamics). They also have transverse, or near-transverse, electrical and magnetic fields, waves and field wave-vectors. But whereas the waves composing a photon are analogous to the transverse waves that propagate in water and limited to circularized motion, the waves composing a massfree charge are analogous to the longitudinal pressure waves responsible for the forward propagation of sound. Massfree charges cannot be described as occupying or forming a globular space, or even a toroidal one, but as occupying or forming a forward-moving cycloidal helix.
Third question(s): We are now quite adept at detecting individual photons. CCD detectors, and similar solid state technologies, are extensively used in astronomy, and in other branches of science, for the explicit detection of photons (which can be individually counted). So, if there are no photons propagating, say from the sun to Earth, then where do the photons that we do detect come from? Where along the sun-Earth path are they created? And what are they created from? How do we observationally detect the parent entities from which photons are created?
Think of it as the same energy that the "field" imparts to things. Aetherometry has identified just what the "field" is. Not virtual photons or whatever. Massfree charges. The lowest form of energy in Aetherometry is massfree energy. No charge, no inertia.
The field transmits the energy causing the particle to move and the particle responds by emitting a photon that is generated in the particle(locally) from the energy imparted by the field.
From Aetherometry.
"claims that solar radiation is electrical, not because it is composed of photons, but because it consists of propagating massfree charges. Unlike massbound charges, massfree charges have no fixed spin orientation with respect to forward propagation."
.
