Frequently Asked Questions:

facts about the epola model

 Suggest more faq's to be added and Discuss the epola model here:

jump to: 1.   Who is Prof. Menahem Simhony and how did the epola model begin? with sound clip

jump to: 2.   Does this mean that Relativity is wrong, how do you explain length and time dilation?

jump to: 3.   What about Quantum Theory?

jump to: 4.   What are the crucial experiments to prove the epola model?                          

jump to: 5.   Is the epola model an aether theory?with sound clip

jump to: 6.   The classical electron radius is much bigger than you claim for the size of the electron.    Explain!

jump to: 7.   Why the analogy with sodium chloride (NaCl) crystals?

jump to: 8.   How dense is the epola, does it account for the 'missing mass' in the Universe?

jump to: 9.   What is the epola explanation for a photon?

jump to: 10. How can a rigid crystal lattice be so elastic?

jump to: 11. What recent discoveries of physics did the epola model explain or predict?  with pdf file download

jump to: 12. What else does the epola model predict? with pdf file download

jump to: 13. Why has the epola model not been adopted as a new standard model and when might it be?

jump to: 14.What new experiments need to done?

jump to: 15. How is the lattice stable, what is Earnshaw's theorem and what is the origin of the short range  repulsive force ?  with sound clip       

jump to:   16. If the epola explains electromagnetic and gravitational 'force at a distance' for atomic matter, what explains the transfer of electrostatic force between the epola particles in the epola lattice?     with sound clip

jump to: 17. What are the implications for atomic nuclei?

jump to: 18. How can the atomic orbital electrons be stable when moving through the epola?

jump to: 19. Do the rules of entropy allow the epola model?

jump to: 20. Why don't the electrons and positrons of the lattice annihilate one another?

jump to: 21. Is there scope to develop the epola model further?



R  Guy Grantham   Sept 2003/Feb2004

 Suggest more faq's to be added and Discuss the epola model here:




1. Who is Dr. Menahem Simhony and how did the epola model begin?

Prof.Menahem Simhony is a retired associate professor of physics from the Hebrew University, Jerusalem, appointed Prof Emeritus in Oct 2006. He is now 90years of age (b.1922) but until recently had continued to actively develop and promote his electron-positron lattice (epola) model of the vacuum space at meetings around the World, despite many early snubs without explanation from the peer review journals. He was honoured (and greatly delighted) on 10th Nov.2009 by presentation of a plaque and scroll in recognition of his epola model - please note the yellow flash on this site's home page and follow the link to this other tribute site hosted by Dr Pete Moore in the USA.  (Don't fail to access the tabs at the top of the first page).

Professor Simhony nowadays quotes Cicero's words to the Senate: "Feci quod potui, faciant meliora potentes" - 'I have done what I could, let those who can, do better'. He invites all to develop his work and only asks that one should respect his efforts and accord him proper reference and attribution in that which follows.

His background is in experimental semiconductor research, particularly working with crystals, in which topics he has many publications and is often referenced by modern researchers (try a literature search). He has spoken about the implications of epola at conventions and seminars around the world and has made many presentations, mainly at meetings of the American Physical Society in the USA, on topics ranging from neutrinos, through superconductivity to cosmology.

The epola model began as a result of Prof Simhony's work in semiconductor research with the concept of electrons and 'holes'.


Listen in on a discussion with him on the influence of P.A.M.Dirac in this brief Windows Media Player sound clip lasting 1 minute ( 84 KB)

jump to web site

Go back to faq list 


2. Does this mean that Relativity is wrong, how do you explain length and time dilation?

No, relativity was not 'wrong' when Einstein produced the Special Theory of Relativity at a time when his contemporaries at the end of the nineteenth and beginning of the twentieth century were seeking to establish the nature of the continuous luminiferous aether/ether thought to be responsible for carrying light waves. Newton's corpuscular theory of light of 1672 had succumbed by 1825 to Huygens' wave theory, itself dating from 1690, and developed by Fresnel, Malus, Young and other famous pioneers. In early times it had been expected that the speed of light would be slower in vacuum than through transparent liquids or solids. Faraday proposed a dielectric aether and in 1865 Maxwell had established working laws for carrying light in the aether but none could find it. Michelson and Morley were unable to identify it with their famous experiment in 1887 whilst Fitzgerald, Poincaré, Lorentz and Larmor, based on the theories of Boscovic 1711-1787 and of Mach, came up with a principle of relativity involving the non-constancy of mass, time and length dilation by 1904. By 1920 Einstein had returned to embrace the concept of an aether  (see 'Why did Einstein Come Back to the Ether?'  Apeiron Vol 8 No.3, July 2001 by Galina Granek)  


In 1905, Einstein brilliantly sidestepped the whole issue with his Special Relativity Theory by declaring a set of constitutional rules which specified certain assumptions as fact. Namely, the laws of physics are the same everywhere in the same inertial frame of reference; the velocity of light is always the same and independent of the velocity of the source. He was able to establish a working mathematical model where simultaneity of time is relative for different observers and mass is dependent on velocity but an aether is not required and where light is corpuscular in transit and a wave on arrival. Corrections were made (Sagnac, 1913) to explain certain anomalies before Einstein produced his General Theory of Relativity in 1916 to include accelerated frames of reference. Despite apparent success with the famous e=mc2 law (cavalierly extended from electrons to everything), Einstein's mathematics were not based in fact nor understanding of physics but provided a way forward for science for another century with hypothetical consequences such as time and length dilation and a photon which travels as a Newtonian corpuscle but arrives as a wave. Time and length dilation in the vacuum are a consequence of the basic postulates and have not been confirmed reproducibly by experiment, nor even to be to be real when any reputed effect on 'atomic clocks' in Eastwards vsWestwards aircraft is likely to be a consequence of change of decay rates in nuclei as a result of differing velocity through the epola (see faq10 and faq12(vii) below). Because Relativity Theories assume a constant value for c (the speed of light in vacuo) in a non-accelerating frame of reference, any change of 'c' or of alpha (the fine structure constant), would be interpreted as a time or length dilation.

Recall the apparent success of earlier Aristotelian and Ptolemaic models of the Sun circling the Earth, replaced by the geocentric model of Copernicus, eventually to be replaced by the Brahe-Kepler-Galileo-Newton revisions to explain planetary motion around the Sun which then quickly led to the discovery of Neptune and Pluto. Relativity has served its purpose too but is no longer adequate for our times of GPS, cosmic astronomy and space travel. It is based on false premises that "light is always propagated [instead of propagates] in empty space with a definite [finite and everywhere] velocity c which is independent of the state of motion of the emitting body". This now is unsatisfactory and it is wrong to hold back science. Unfortunately relativity it is taught as a truth and has become 'a fact of nature' for several generations of modern students rather than a mathematical model of an artificially limited set of circumstances.

  Go back to faq list

3. What about Quantum Theory?

The Quantum Theory of light was initiated by Planck about 1900,  as another means to resolve the aether problem, formulated by Heisenburg in 1925, then liberated by Dirac in 1925, eventually to become modern Quantum Field Theory although doomed by the 'Copenhagen Interpretation' of Bohr, Heisenburg, Born and others (from about 1912-30) never to match reality. It has never reconciled with Relativity Theories to provide a unified theory and these still present a great schism in modern science. Necessarily so, because both camps are based upon mathematical solutions of two different approaches to a flawed view of natural physics. Describing unknown phenomena as 'quantum effects' offers a very useful escape clause for modern science.  Richard Feynman (1918-1986) wrote that "nature is absurd" but one really ought to question the theory or the methodology when its conclusions are so far divorced from reality.

This said, QT does expect the random continuous appearance and disappearance of electron-positron pairs in vacuum space, and one can argue that these would naturally become organised into an epola lattice with the release of thermal energy in the manner that crystals seed from solution [see faq 19 below] . Modern Quantum Field Theory, especially as proposed by the late Giuliano Preparata (1942-2000, another recent heretic of physics), may offer reconciliation with the real world and provide a reasonable model for the existence of matter. [see his book "An introduction to a Realistic Quantum Physics" G.Preparata. ISBN 981-238-176-7 World Scientific 2002]

 Go back to faq list

4. What are the crucial experiments to prove the epola model?

The epola model is based upon three well-known experiments:

(i) The scientifically sound interpretation of the Michelson-Morley experiment (1887) actually proved that the carrier of light is not continuous but particulate and the velocity of light is independent of the source velocity.

(ii) Rutherford's experiment (1911) to pass helium nuclei (alpha particles) through gold foil which showed the rarified nature of atomic matter.

(iii) Anderson's experiment (1932) which demonstrated the binding energy of electrons and positrons in the vacuum to be 1.02MeV for the liberation or capture of an electron-positron pair, always and only as a pair, of 'ions'.

Further proof with the Photoelectric Effect.

As early as 1690, Christian Huygens was trying to define light rays as waves.  He proposed that a beam of light could be represented by a wavefront where each point on the wavefront acted as new source of secondary waves or wavelets which jointly defined the next position of the light beam's wavefront. Light propagated by the extension of this process and he was able to explain reflection and refraction of light.  Huygens did not consider the propagation of light other than in the forwards direction and it was Kirchoff, who used the fact that light has frequency, to develop the theory more fully.  Spherically expanding, diverging and converging secondary wavefronts interfere, adding or cancelling according to phase to give an integrated wavefront.

 The photoelectric effect was discovered by Hertz in 1887, who discovered that light shining on metal electrodes caused their electrical charge to change. In 1899, Lenard found that emission of electrons from the metal in the light, but not in the dark, caused the electrical charge to decrease. Lenard established rules for the photoelectric effect but these could not be explained by a wave theory of light. Einstein declared that the kinetic energy of a photon of light was transferred to a free electron in the metal so that it was expelled from the surface if the photon was sufficiently energetic to overcome the work function of the metal. The 'work function' is called the 'exit energy' in Russia, which better explains what it is.

Consider the implications of Einstein's explanation. A photon of light - massless except that it is travelling at the velocity of light and behaving as a particle or corpuscle as per Newton, hits an electron and flicks it away from the metal into space. The typical energy of a photon in the UV spectrum is, say, 10eV whilst the electron's mass or energy is 511,000 eV. Could you imagine playing billiards using a table tennis ball for the cue ball? Alternatively, consider shooting a bullet weighing 10 grams at a metal sphere weighing 500kg (1/2 tonne). Classical mechanics and straightforward common-sense tell us that the kinetic energy of the "particle" would not shift the electron, the bullet or photon would bounce off, make a hole, melt and be absorbed or shatter, turning most of the kinetic energy to heat. However, in the epola model the photon energy is given as the vibration of the bound electrons and positrons of the lattice - just like playing billiards, the cue ball is the same size as the object ball. The photoelectric effect can be considered to be another proof of the epola model. And the same applies for photo-ionisation.

Go back to faq list 

5. Is the epola model an aether theory?

Prof Simhony is adamant that the epola model is not an aether theory. The long-sought-after aether had no mass and was continuous (fluid-like), such that motion through it would cause winds. In later times, some people have come to think that an aether ought to explain the nature of mass but this was not its original reason for being. [see faq 16]


The epola is particulate, with real substance and much higher mass density than atomic matter (typically ~109 times greater). The epo-lattice is very open and not at all solid (it is like a vacuum) because the bond lengths exceed the radius of the electrons and positrons by some 50 times. We now know from the work of Rutherford that the nuclei and electrons of atomic matter are very rarefied. Indeed, when scaled to match the radius of the nucleus with that of the Sun, an atom has with much larger distances between nucleus and electrons than those between Sun and planets and some thousands of times more separated than the epola particles. The epola does not need to split apart for the passage of atomic matter, atomic particles filter through the epola like a shoal of fish through a coarse net. In this way and by the vibrations of its electrons and positrons, the structure of the local epo-lattice defines and controls the motion of all atomic matter and particles and is responsible for the phenomena of inertia and gravity.

The epola is not an aether as originally defined and far from being aethereal in the literary sense but a dense aggregation state of leptons. However, Prof Simhony does accede to saying that the epola would have satisfied Faraday's search for a dielectric aether and the mechanistic basis for the Maxwell equations published in 1873.


rev. 19Nov 04 rgg


Listen to this sound clip of Prof Simhony's objections - also available from  the Introduction page of this site.(2mins, .wma file 99KB


Go back to faq list 


6. The classical electron radius is much bigger than you claim for the size of the electron. Explain!

The classical electron radius (or Lorentz radius), calculated from the electron’s charge to mass ratio (RL = e2/me.c2, where e is charge), is resolved to 2.82x10-15m (2.82 fm) as a charged hollow sphere - larger than a proton that has 1836 times greater mass but less than the Compton radius used by the Standard Model of particle physics. The latter is derived from the Compton wavelength of the electron divided by 2p, as if an electron were described by a circular closed wave, with the radius 3.86x10-13m representing the probable location of the electron. Quantum electrodynamics (QED) sees the electron as a point particle but more realistically as either the  Schwartzschild radius of a black hole of the same mass at ~1.35x10-57m or from QED based experiment at 16MeV energy at ~10-24m.


Experimental measurements dating from the 1970's, by scattering of fast electron beams, have given values of approx. 1x10-16m (or 0.1fm). Prof Simhony contends that as all measured nuclear particles exhibit similar density to each other, suggesting a particular class of aggregation of matter, then electrons would be of that same class with that same density, as indicated by experiment. Calculated from the mass and that nuclear density, the electron's radius is 9.4 x10-17m (0.094fm). He has used this notional measure of radius to show that the lattice constant (bond length) is very large in comparison with the radius of the electrons and positrons, allowing a very strong yet exceedingly sparse and elastic structure in comparison with 'conventional' densely filled ionic crystals in the aggregation state of atomic matter.


More recent experimental measurements by high speed impact scattering measurements for the minimum size of the electron have presented a smaller radius as techniques have improved, with suggested upper bounds, for example, of radius  < 2.8 x 10-19m at 90% confidence limit (arXiv:hep-ph/0002172) or even, by estimation from interactions of the weak force (arXiv:hep-ph/9811522) , as small as 10-27m.  It may eventually be shown that leptons (and quarks) do not even have any substantial material existence in our 3D world if the multidimensional string or brane theories hold good!

These newer estimates of smaller particle size do not contradict Prof Simhony's initial conclusions about the nature of an electron positron lattice with bonds much longer than the radii of the particles at the lattice nodes.

Studies within the theory of Stochastic Electrodynamics (SED) assume a background of randomly appearing particles in a zero-point electromagnetic field (ZPF), the 'quantum foam’.  [See articles by some of the founders of SED; T.W.Marshall and T.H.Boyer ]. Despite some successes, SED had failed to recognise the importance of intrinsic spin of particles until this was corrected by L.Bosi; G.Cavalleri et al with ‘A review of SED with and without spin’. [see: ] where the energy of an electron was attributed primarily to spin radiations and secondarily to electromagnetic wavelength so that radius of a gyrating electron is accepted at < 10-19m.  However, others have suggested that the electron has a toroidal structure such that it has a thin cross section but a larger size ‘face-on’. [see for instance W. Christie’s ‘Wavicle’ and H.Torres-Silva, Ingeniare. Revista chilena de ingeniería, vol. 16 Nº 1, 2008, pp. 72-77] but these generally are based on a closed Compton wave. One should remember that, according to the epola model, the Compton wave of the electron is a compression wave of the epola with one excess electron or positron per half wave cluster of 11 million epola cells, having the photon energy of an electron and is not the electron itself (see section7.5 page 62 of the paperback ).

A free electron in the epola would strongly bias the adjacent positrons bound in the lattice toward itself and repel the adjacent bound electrons. These electrons and positrons would extend secondary effects so that outwards of a few lattice units the effect would be to present concentric +ve and -ve layers of charge building outwards from the free ‘guest’ electron. The free electron effectively would move through the epola as a bubble of negative charge, this is what has been perceived as a larger effective radius of an electron. The electrostatic charge of a guest electron, and more so of a guest nucleus, would strongly distort the lattice and the face centred cubic (fcc) lattice structure would most certainly be significantly distorted or even ruptured in the local vicinity within several lattice constants of the guest particle, shielding a small guest electron from direct action except from very high speed impacts.

[Also see and follow the link to the work of David Koltick in the previous section on this site:Introduction to Epola Ref.6 ]


[FAQ 6 revised 22July05 rgg. Rev 24Sept08 – SEDS inc  rgg]

 Go back to faq list


7. Why the analogy with sodium chloride (NaCl) crystals?

All the inorganic alkali halides are built of only two kinds of oppositely charged particles each with the unit electric charge of either the electron or positron. The binding is purely ionic (not covalent nor metallic, etc.) and the lattices are stable. Amongst the 20 alkali halide lattices, sodium chloride belongs to the most popular and most densely packed lattice type (viz. face centred cubic, fcc) Also, its ions each come from the same period of the periodic table of elements meaning that they have the same structure of inner electron orbitals and therefore are well matched. You could argue that potassium chloride (KCl) is also well matched but there is more information available about NaCl.

 Calculation of the dimensions of the unit cube of the epola, from a binding energy of 1.02MeV per epo pair, based on NaCl data give a value of 4.4fm whilst data from all the other alkali halides yield values ranging from 4.0 to 4.8 fm. Simhony points out that the analogy cannot be drawn too far and states that the NaCl ions detect the dynamic presence of their inner electrons. These ions are not dense points of charge, the ions touch and may even overlap each other. The epola particles however are effectively points of charge, being the particles with the greatest charge/ mass ratio of all, at a distance apart of 50 times their radii or, say, forty times when we allow for the thermal vibrations of the particles about their nominal rest positions.

 The epola is much less complicated than the NaCl crystal lattice, being uniform without directional or boundary effects. The analogy can be considered adequate because the calculated bulk deformation velocity using this data proves to match the measured velocity of light.

Note that a clear rocksalt crystal becomes cloudy and electrically conducting on exposure to UV light of 8eV when Na+ and Cl- ion pairs are freed from the lattice. This effect reverses when the crystal is left in the dark for the ions to bind into the crystal lattice with the release of energy. This is completely analogous to Anderson's experiment  to liberate electron positron pairs from any point in the vacuum with the submission of1.02MeV of energy and their subsequent disappearance with the release of energy in the form of g-photons.

 Go back to faq list


8. How dense is the epola, does it account for the missing mass in the universe?

The density of the epola can be calculated from the dimensions of the unit cube of the fcc lattice and the mass of an electron (positron).

There is one electron or one positron of mass 9.11x.10-31kg per epola unit cube of 4.4 fm side dimension giving a mass density of 1x1013 kg/m3 in comparison with water at 1x103kg/m3. The epola is therefore 1010 (or 10 billion times) the density of water.

The epola has no 'weight' however because it is both the source and carrier of gravity. Because the electrons and positrons are so small and separated by fifty times their radius, the epola is very rarefied and not at all 'dense' in the everyday sense of the word. The epola structure is much more open than ordinary ionic or metallic crystal structures where the ions are closely packed and effectively touching.

Consider this comment in the Proceedings of the Royal Society, 'A Dynamical Theory of the Electromagnetic Field' by Prof. J Clerk Maxwell FRS,  October 1864.“….. if we look for the explanation of the force of gravitation in the action of a surrounding medium, the constitution of the medium must be such that, when far from the presence of gross matter, it has immense intrinsic energy, part of which is removed from it wherever we find the signs of gravitating force." Maxwell nor the scientists of that time could not conceive of the epola and he went on to say - "This result does not encourage us to look in this direction for the explanation of the force of gravity. “  

It is difficult to admit to the mass of the epola being able to account for the 'missing mass' in the universe since its mass density is far too great and the expectations for Dark Matter and Dark Energy may be based on false assumptions. The epola model does predict, however, that the regions of 'dark' matter are regions of epola at a different lower temperature to our own region (~3.2K).'Grey' matter in space, which some think to be 'missing mass', is a warmer epola region at ~100K. Some regions of space which appear as distant stars, white nebulae or galaxies will be regions of much higher epola temperature.  In all these regions the velocity of light (in vacuo) will be different to that here and where the epola is gaseous or holed there will be no light, such as the case of a 'black hole'. We also must consider that the poly-crystalline epola of crystallites contained within 'grain boundaries' of dislocations and flaws in the lattice will exhibit the property assigned to the emergence of gravitation in the epola by weakened bonds. Regions of pure epola distant from gravitating masses might exhibit 'push' as repulsive gravity causing 'expansion'. (We are currently investigating this possibility as described in a draft paper, now made public in the Developments Section of this web-site).

(See: IOP physicsweb, Dec 2003, )

However, read Essay #19 - Of Dark Matter, Quintessence, Aether and Ether  by the late Sid Deutsch (d.Jan9 2006, at age 92)- which rather dismisses the current importance attached to dark matter. Here at this website where you will find many more of his  interesting essays too:

 Go back to faq list

9. What is the epola explanation for a photon?

The Meaning of a Photon and Particle-Wave Duality.

As a general rule, the photon represents the quantum (or amount) of energy that is transferred in the EM wave motion from one epola particle to the next in line.

When the vibrational energy of each particular bound epola particle in a low frequency/long wavelength EM wave is not much higher than the average particle energy in thermal motion, then the photon energy is undetectable/indistinguishable. What we can detect is actually the energy transferred by a half-wave cluster of particles in the EM bulk deformation wave. Then, the energy transferred from one half-wave cluster to the next can be considered as an analogue of the photon.

This, too, highlights the meaning of particle-wave duality of a photon. When the photon energy transferred in the wave by a single particle to the next one is detectable, then the photon appears as a particle. In the alternate case, when this energy is undetectable, then the photon analogue is a wave.

The photon does not exist in nature, neither as a particle nor as a wave. What is existing in nature are material media consisting of distinct particles and vibrations of these particles that create waves in the media.

Dictated M.Simhony 16 July 2003

Effectively, the photon behaves as a particle at greater than the Compton frequency, in the gamma ray band, when each half-wave cluster contains an excess of one electron or positron. Below the Compton wave frq, in the X-ray band or lesser frequencies, the photon assumes wavelike properties.


10. How can a rigid crystal lattice be so elastic?

For a non-scientist, to say the epola is a crystal lattice means 'hard and brittle' but this is a misunderstanding of elasticity and plasticity. Billiard balls are hard but highly elastic, a bell or glass 'rings' because it is hard and elastic, a car's springs are hardened steel and highly elastic. The epola is a highly elastic medium which requires only small displacements of its particles about their normal (rest) position to accommodate the motion of most atomic matter particles. Small displacements require only proportionately small forces which resonate or pass on the energy without (significant) loss - like a weight suspended and bouncing from a truly perfect spring.

Electrons and nuclei of atomic matter pass through the epola typically causing less deflection of all but the nearest bound electrons and positrons (e-po particles) of the epola than their vibrations already due to thermal effects. The passage of large nuclei present greater difficulty and this may prove to be significant in considerations of the decay of large fissile nuclei and their interactions with the epola, especially at higher velocity.

 Go back to faq list

11. What recent discoveries of physics did the epola model explain or predict ?

(i) Dark and grey matter in the cosmos.

(ii) The Casimir effect

(iii) Variable light velocity (or apparent change of fine structure constant*) in distant regions

J. K. Webb et al., "Further Evidence for Cosmological Evolution of the Fine Structure Constant," Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 091301 (2001) astro-ph/0012539.

*SEE ALSO  our Recent papers including a derivation of the fine structure constant from the epola model and later work by Webb et al. until recently (Nov. 2011)

P. C. Davies, T. M. Davis and C. H. Lineweaver, "Black Holes Constrain Varying Constants," Nature 418, 602 (2002).

(iv) Frozen light and photonic crystals.



See other examples in the full list of epola presentations by M Simhony, as pdf file (74KB) available also from the Home page of this site


Go back to faq list 


12. What else does the epola model predict?

(i)The most relevant prediction for physics is the epola explanation of inertia and gravity. Distortions of the epola around guest particles cause gravitational attraction and the bulk deformation waves accompanying moving guest particles account for inertia and momentum. The millions upon millions of epola particles which vibrate to form the accompanying waves associated with each and every guest particle moving in the epola collectively attempt to maintain the frequencies of those vibrational waves. This and the generally recognised property of 'frequency invariance' of electromagnetic waves are further proof of a particulate carrier of wave energy. [See the APS poster abstract "Deformations of epola ....."  ]

 (ii)Another important prediction is that a neutrino is a paired electron and positron sharing an epola accompanying wave (waveguide) through the epola, analogous to an exciton in semiconductor physics. The epola behaves as an n-type semiconductor in our region of the cosmos with its surplus of electrons.   Positronium, the positron/electron quasi-atom, is another aggregated state of epola particles.  It is possible that an explanation for muons and tau particles and their neutrinos will be accommodated by a more complex system of epola particles.

(iii)Interactions of the epola and nuclei are predicted to account for nuclear decay [see faq 10] with the release from the epola of a positron/electron with a neutrino/antineutrino. Decay will be found to be dependent of activity of or movement in the epola. Nuclear decay has already been shown to change with x-ray (high frequency epola vibrational waves) activation.

(iv)A study of the work required to cool an enclosed volume of (near) vacuum to very nearly absolute zero should show a step of significantly increased effort required from 4K when the local epola temperature is reached. We should detect the 'latent heat' of the epola.

(v)A narrow channel (~micron wide) enclosed between massive blocks of dense material should exhibit a region where the speed of light is slowed. The experiment might be made to compare the velocity of light in a fibre optic, inside and outside of the channel. (This experiment has some similarity to the Casimir effect).

(vi)If molecular material were accelerated to approx.100km/s the temperature would rise to 40 degrees Celsius, which would prove fatal for the human body as normal cooling techniques would not help. When semiconductors were sped to 300km/s they would cease to function when carrier electrons and holes were no longer freed, and at 1000km/s metals would not behave as conductors. At velocities of 2000km/s molecules would break down, above 10,000 km/s atoms would  be ionised, even the higher valence electrons would start to be lost. Superlumic velocity (above the speed of light at 300,000 km/s) is allowed but only for particles or nuclei and at the expense of great amounts of energy. We are unlikely to see this prediction fully proven because we are unable to achieve these velocities, even the space exploration vehicle 'Voyager' has attained only, I believe, ~70km/s, but these effects may be the catastrophe awaiting technology relying on the standard model of physics and lead to the start of Natural Physics.  [fig5 p91A the paperback -  The Electron-Positron Lattice Space, Cause of Relativity and Quantum Effects , Physics Section 5, The Hebrew University, Jerusalem 1990 (158 pages). [Download the book as pdf from the Home page of this site '

(vii) Prof Simhony claims it might be possible to prove experimentally the orbit adjustment redshifts in the emission spectra of atomic radiation sources moving parallel to Earth. The expected frequency shift will depend on velocity of the atom relative to the epola and not on gravitational redshift nor direction towards or away from the observer. It may be that this effect is already experienced (limits of experimental error ?) When atomic clocks are flown Eastwards and Westwards in Relativity experiments. [sect 9.the paperback (above)]

(viii) Prof Simhony has detailed mechanisms for conductivity and superconductivity . Interactions between certain accompanying waves in the permeating epola and the superconductor's solid lattice may open some conditions to conduction electrons and therefore free them of the space charge in the ionic matrix of metals. (see refs: 37, 40, 47, 54, 56, 76 in the full list of references (pdf file).  You can download a pdf file of ref54, Prof Simhony's poster presentation at the phonons89 meeting, here .  See also this article appearing in Nature Letters of Aug 2006, reporting the involvement of phonons in superconductivity;


Go back to faq list 


13. Why has the epola model not been adopted as a new standard model and when might it be so?

The vast investment and massive employment in the physics industry of the standard model will not allow distractions readily, consider the cost of particle colliders seeking to advance Quantum Theory, of the search for gravitons and of neutrino research . The peer review system, essential to avoid frivolous distractions, is biased to maintaining the status quo. As also the academic system, which produces new scientists pre-programmed in old science. Only when the extrapolations of misguided science collapse catastrophically, as they must, will alternative models be considered or even reviewed conscientiously. Wait for, perhaps, another 50 years! Yet there is hope, see these two examples: IOP physicsweb in Jan 2003 and AIP Bulletin of Physics News dated Jan 2004.   Also, see the papers and articles by Johann Marinšek at Of particular relevance is his paper on "Non-convertibility of inertial mass into energy...", ( ), which appeared in Journal of New Energy, Vol. 5, No. 3, 2001. and his article: "Faraday versus Ampère..." (

Go back to faq list 

14.What new experiments need to be done?

None, the proof is already there by correct scientific interpretation of existing results. Detailed examination of the work of Michelson and Morley completed by Dayton Miller and validated by M. Allais already may indicate motion of the Earth and solar system relative to the fabric of the epola.  (Try a web search)

 Go back to faq list

15. How is the lattice stable, what is Earnshaw's theorem and what is the short range repulsive force?

Earnshaw's theorem on magnetism (1842), tells us that a simple system of electrostatic forces of attraction and repulsion alone cannot support a stable lattice, it would collapse or explode. Another short range, repulsive force is required to stabilise the lattice as the nodes approach one another to within twice the lattice constant. This force therefore cannot be another electrostatic force (by definition), nor nuclear because the operating distance is too great. Therefore it is proposed that the force is magnetic most possibly due to the intrinsic spin moments of the electrons and positrons.


Listen to a continuation of the discussion above (faq 1).Windows media player sound clip lasting  3m:31s (.wma file 277KB)  

Go back to faq list 

16. If the epola explains electromagnetic and gravitational 'force at a distance' for atomic matter, what explains the force between epola particles in the lattice?

We cannot know, yet. Science is only able to evaluate properly what happens at the nanoscale - the nanometre (10-9m) level of observation. The epola exists at the femtometre (10-15m) level, a million times finer. To observe interactions at that range that we probably need to progress beyond attometres (10-18m) down to the 10-21m level of observation. (= milli-atto = zeptometres, zm) or even to 10-24m (= micro-atto = yoctometres, ym).  I suspect we shall have to content ourselves with Quantum Field Theories for the next few centuries (see faq 3 above).


You can hear a discussion with Prof Simhony about this topic here. The sound clip (.wma file, 278KB) lasts 5m:51s

Go back to faq list 


17. What are the implications for leptons and atomic nuclei?

The standard model(s) of physics present the contents of the nucleus (nucleons) as distinct and different fundamentally from the electron family of particles outside the nucleus of an atom which are collectively termed leptons. The leptons, which are said to have no internal structure (i.e...not made from quarks), include the electron (511KeV), the muon (106.6MeV), the tauon (1.784GeV) and the neutrinos associated with each, plus all their antiparticles - the anti-electron being the positron. Observation of extended lifetimes of other than the electron/positron is said to be a result of time dilation, however, one should determine the nature of the leptons before jumping to conclusions. The epola model explains the electron-neutrino and its anti-neutrino to be an epo (electron-positron pair) in a shared deformation waveguide travelling through the epola. The muon and tauon may yet prove to be complex particles with existence as a function of the epola or perhaps the electron will prove to be comprised of them.

Surprisingly and unashamedly, the standard model does allow these fundamentally different particles, the leptons, to be generated by radio-active decay and interactions of the weak force from within the nucleus - which is made of quarks!  The epola model suggests an interaction between the fabric of the epola and the nucleus, probably when the short-range repulsive force is overcome.

The passage of nuclei through the epo-lattice is reasonably comfortable up to the size of a copper atom (64 amu) after which larger members of the periodic table must feel progressively greater effort. This effort will, of course, be reflected in the inertia of the molecular objects containing those nuclei. The much larger, irregularly shaped nuclei of unstable radio-active atoms may be demonstrating this unease by fission and interaction with the epola.

 Go back to faq list

18. How can the atomic orbital electrons be stable when moving through the epola?

The stability of the orbital electrons is given by the foundation of integer numbers of wavelengths of their accompanying epola deformation waves and the resulting electromagnetic waves (de Broglie waves). Having closed (elliptical) waveguides for the (absolute) motion of the electron protects the orbit from decay or excitation. Non-integer numbers of wavelengths per orbit will instantly decay by loss of energy to the epola. Two electrons are unable to share a waveguide path unless their spins are opposite - explaining the Pauli exclusion principle. When the atom is in motion through the epola, as it inevitably is, the waveguide can maintain its integrity by equally, on opposite sides of the orbit, losing and gaining random (thermal) eccentricities in the few from the billions of epola particles forming the waveguide when it distorts its ellipticity. In the case of hydrogen's orbital electron, the electromagnetic waveguide is formed in accordance with Huygen's rules, from secondary effects of the primary displacements of epo particles preforming their path at the speed of light 137 times per rotation of the electron. The electron moves at 2200km/s and is therefore able to maintain a robust orbit up to atomic velocities approaching that velocity before the electron is stripped away - or left behind.

Atoms located here on the Earth have their electron orbitals adjusted for that motion and travel 'vacuum transparent'. If the motion of the atom is altered however all and every orbit must be adjusted during acceleration, exhibiting inertia. Prof Simhony has shown (paperback - section 9.5) that to bring the velocity of an atom to 600km/s relative to Earth, requires 1eV per orbital electron to adjust its orbital to the motion. Raising the velocity to 2400km/s increases the energy to 16eV per orbital electron which exceeds the first ionisation energy of atoms therefore the atoms would become ionised. Above 240,000 km/s the ionisation energy of even the innermost orbits is exceeded and therefore there would no atoms, only nuclei and particles - well below the speed of light (300,000km/s) in our local region of epola space.

ref: Paperback, The Electron-Positron Lattice Space, Cause of Relativity and Quantum Effects , Physics Section 5, The Hebrew University, Jerusalem 1990 (158 pages).'

Go back to faq list 

19. Do the rules of entropy allow the epola model?

Entropy is quoted as a measure of disorder. The significant rule states that entropy of the system increases therefore we need to determine whether the structured lattice (more order) is of higher entropy than the random appearance of epo pairs in the vacuum energy level as QT would have us believe. Nature tends to order on the macro scale , look around you, atoms form molecules, form substances, form crystals, form walls, chairs, people.... Entropy is increased in the system as a whole however, not many people look exactly alike and even if they do they are not moving or facing the same way at the same time. Plus there is the increased thermal randomisation of the microscale. Structure seems to present opportunity for disorder of the system as a whole with each epo-particle presented with six degrees of freedom. The random thermal motions of the epola particles of the epola model is seen by the standard models as the so-called "background radiation" left over from the "big bang". Or perhaps it was a "big flash" when the epola crystallised from a random soup of electron-positron pairs and light and other frequencies of electromagnetic radiation were allowed to travel as photons? Are the neutrinos, as exciton pairs in the epola, condensing on and growing the outer surface of the epola universe?


20. Why don't the electrons and positrons of the lattice annihilate one another?

Positrons were originally termed anti-electrons and considered to be the electrons of an antimatter universe. It was thought, and is taught still by the standard model, that electrons and positrons mutually collapse into each other and all their mass is converted to pure massless energy as gamma () rays according to the famous formula.

As long ago as 1932 but after the standard model was launched, Carl David Anderson showed that an electron and positron pair is generated (the epola model says liberated, and certainly not created) at any point of the vacuum near to matter (preferentially where the epola is distorted by a guest particle) by a pulse of energy of 1.02MeV (by a suitable ray with any excess energy adding to the kinetic energy of the pair).  

This effect is directly analogous to the well-known liberation (not creation) and recapture of ions in ordinary ionic crystal lattices when sufficient energy is applied (or released) to counteract the binding energy in that lattice. The ions do not convert their mass to energy when they 'disappear' into the lattice, they merely release their binding energy  

Prof Simhony argues that the epola model shows a similar effect, proving also that positrons are stable - in the bound state.  In our region of the Universe where there is a significant presence of atomic matter (of the type as we know it) then there is an abundance of surplus 'free' electrons as valence electrons and conduction electrons etc. (so the epola corresponds to an n-type semi-conductor), such that any free positron is soon paired-off and lost from view into the lattice.  


The quasi-atom positronium is formed by an electron-positron pair with the electron orbiting the positron, until it too collapses back into the epo-lattice with the release of its energy.  This energy does not match the formula value though, once again disproving the annihilation theory.  

The epola model further claims that a neutrino also is a paired electron-positron travelling through the epola analogous to an exciton in semi-conductor physics (see APS abstracts at this site) - perhaps you can imagine it in the way you sometimes see a bead of liquid skimming across a hot liquid's surface, until in 'falls' in and disappears. 

 Go back to faq list

21. Is there scope to develop the epola model further?

Yes of course there is scope to develop any working model further. Prof Simhony has convincingly developed the epola model in all aspects of physics (outside the nucleus) for more than thirty years but this has merely opened up a whole new opportunity for research.

The neutrino solution as an exciton analogue requires full investigation and extending to the whole family of leptons (See APS Abstracts from this site).

The interactions of epola and the atomic nucleus is yet largely unexplored. The weak force, or electroweak force after its unification with electromagnetism, along with an assumed X-particle is held to be responsible for beta decay in QED theory. Can the epola model obviate the requirement for proton decay?  Is there a connection with 'cold fusion'?

The explanation of inertia and gravity and for the mechanisms of superconductivity as functions of the electromagnetic epola give scope for new quantitative investigations.Could the epola model explain the mechanism by which dowsing works, possibly as a gravity/inertia phenomenon? (see  Does the epola model offer a development of the claimed but elusive inertia beam experiments of Podkletnov? (Read about this and other inertia beam experiments by Ning Li at and  Hear interviews with Eugene Podkletnov at  and )

The search by Quantum physicists for "Higg's boson" and the "Higg field" (dare I say - a modern aether) to explain the universal property of mass may prove unnecessary when the epola is fully researched. The property of inertia is explained by the epola as a function of the volume of a particle distorting the epola and causing an accompanying wave in the epola with wavelength proportional to the velocity of the guest particle, preceding the moving particle at the speed of light. The inertia of the particle is imparted by the inertia of the relevant vibrating epola particles. The intrinsic inertia of the epola particles could be explained by the very different effective ranges of the two forces stabilising the lattice.

Prof Simhony's explanations of the phonon-epola interaction mechanisms of superconductivity offer exciting prospects for design and development of higher temperature superconductors (see list of epola presentations by M Simhony - as a pdf file, also available from the front page of this site).

Incidentally, the energy of the shortest possible wavelength in the epola, comprising two lattice units, at 140MeV, corresponds to the energy of a pion. Perhaps the family members of neutral, positive and negative pion with their relationship to neutrinos can be explained by the epola model?

PLEASE SEE  the Developments page for Recent papers, including PIRT2010 Conference presentations and ongoing investigations of the epola model.

If you wish to discuss the mathematical details of the epola model or about any specific topics in depth then please contact me at: (Please use the keyword 'positron' in the subject line of your emails to differentiate from spam)

The epola model requires further development and its applications await.   rev rgg 19.Nov04, Apr07 + spam message.

Go back to faq list 

rgg added Maxwell quote FAQ8, rev 12/6/05, link added to FAQ8- 9 Sept 05; FAQ13- 7May06. added Sardin link FAQ4 5Oct06. Added phonons dnld/link to FAQ12(viii) and pointed from FAQ21 in Apr07. Generalincl Prof emeritus title to MS. Jn 07. Aug08 pions incld rev faq1 3jul10. FAQ1 updated MS'sage jun11replaced links to antigrav 16jun1.  20Nov2011 - added ref to fine structure constant in FAQ11 and Developments page in FAQ21; 12Apr2013 extened FAQ8,added refs to MMx solutions by Joseph Levy in FAQ4.  4May2017 updated some old links in faq#6.  



Suggest more faq's to be added and Discuss the epola model here:

(Please use the keyword 'positron' in the subject line of your emails to differentiate from spam)