Here’s a summary of the provided text, with the requested elements marked:
This paper, authored by Miles Mathis, critiques the mainstream scientific theory behind Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR) and Electron Paramagnetic Resonance (EPR). Mathis argues that the current explanations, particularly those involving “intrinsic” or unreal nuclear and electron spins, are fundamentally flawed and based on manufactured concepts like gyromagnetic ratios and g-factors. He contends that these theories are overly complex, illogical, and designed to obscure rather than explain physical phenomena.
Mathis proposes that NMR resonance is not caused by nuclear spin but by the interaction with electrons, specifically the outermost or valence electrons residing near the nucleus. He asserts that these electrons have real wavelengths in the UHF and VHF range, which aligns with the radio frequencies used in NMR. He further explains that these electron wavelengths are a function of their radius and velocity, and that the electron radius is proportional to the photon radius, as demonstrated by his corrected Compton scattering equation.
Mathis uses diagrams of Oxygen-17 (O17) and Oxygen-18 (O18) to illustrate his theory. He suggests that the presence and arrangement of neutrons within the nucleus can suppress or allow the resonance of specific electrons. For example, in O17, a valence electron is free to orbit and resonate, while in O18, neutrons silence both potential resonating electrons. He also addresses the perpendicular magnetic field required in NMR, linking it to the orientation of proton poles and the resulting electron eddies. Mathis criticizes the mainstream explanation for O16, stating it’s not a resonator in Earth’s unbalanced field due to neutron attraction to one pole, which silences the primary electron and consequently the other. He speculates that O16 might resonate on Venus if its magnetic field were balanced, leading to a hypothetical Nuclear Electric Resonance (NER).
Regarding EPR, Mathis dismisses the concept of “unpaired electrons” in orbitals, attributing the phenomenon to pole electrons in molecules, such as OH, that are not suppressed by molecular bonds. He explains that the apparent “unpaired” nature depends on the direction of observation, with different electrons resonating in orthogonal fields.
A significant portion of the paper is dedicated to debunking the Larmor frequency equation, which Mathis claims is back-engineered and contains numerous “fudge factors.” He argues that the equation incorrectly assumes intrinsic spins and cannot account for real physical processes. He proposes a corrected set of equations that derive resonance wavelengths from fundamental properties like electron radius and velocity, bypassing the problematic variables and concepts of mainstream physics. Mathis concludes that the current theories of NMR and EPR are vast overcomplications, rooted in historical errors and leading to invented abstractions like “intrinsic spin” to maintain the façade of understanding. He emphasizes that a true understanding requires mechanics, real particles, and tangible interactions, which he believes his “charge channeling” theory provides.
Key Entities:
- Miles Mathis
- Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR)
- Electron Paramagnetic Resonance (EPR)
- Intrinsic spins
- Nuclear spins
- Electron spins
- Mainstream scientific theory
- Gyromagnetic ratios
- G-factors
- Electrons
- UHF
- VHF
- Radio waves
- Photons
- Compton scattering
- Oxygen-17 (O17)
- Oxygen-18 (O18)
- Neutrons
- Protons
- Oxygen-16 (O16)
- Earth
- Venus
- Nuclear Electric Resonance (NER)
- Free radicals
- OH (molecule)
- Hydrogen (H)
- HO2
- Microwaves
- Larmor frequency equation
- Spin quantum number
- Magnetic field
- Angular momentum
- Magnetic moment
- Torque
- Angular velocity
- Mass
- Charge
- Charge channeling
- Fine structure constant
- Newton’s Lemma IV
- Principia
- Wikipedia
- Copenhagen Interpretation
- Larmor precession
- Electron orbitals
- Photon radius
- Electron radius
- Antiphotons
- Compton scattering equation
- Period 4 elements
- Iron
- De Broglie
- Rutherford’s equation