Using earth derived quantum evidence for cosmic-origin theory

I will try to address my opponent's points one by one as before, although it appears to me that his arguments now seem less inquisitive regarding my alternative cosmological model and his questions seem less confrontational and more assertional-consensus. I gather that his impression was that the details I added in my second debate did not measure up to what he desired. He was dissatisfied with my attempt to add theoretic details about "elemental spatial points" and how this could have produced an elemental energic ether. -One theoretic detail I could add at this point would involve the concept that once a focal "anomaly" appeared in the otherwise-homogeneous first-causal Space, this exact change would then have propagated throughout Space. That would be an important part of the explanation for how a single "Yin and Yang" "disturbance" could have led to a uniform elemental ether in all of Space and thus how a uniform unit-based medium was established which could then serve as the template for organized cosmic systems like atoms, planets, and so on. As for my opponent's repeated request for "mathematical substantiation" for my Model, I can only reiterate the counter argument I made before, that inasmuch as we do not have an ether-based technology or any way of measuring or quantifying etheric phenomena, in our earthbound quantally-mediated setting, of course I cannot give mathematical evidence for my Model. As for my Opponent's request for further information about the "obscure source" of information I mentioned in my last Argument, I will only mention that cryptography (code breaking) was involved. There is an element of confidentiality here, with the related question, should there be indiscriminate dissemination of those details. In any case, I would again state my opinion that it is not german to this debate. My Opponent states his disagreement with my argument regarding redshifts, large scale structures, and the CMB - my position that they just represent more examples of our using quantum derived observational data, and thus do not necessarily demand correlations with my Ether Model (due to our lacking the etheric data needed for such a comparison), He rejects my position and remains an adherent of the consensus position. -I might make another try to clarify my position on these points. In my Ether Model, the near-earth realm, where we make our observations of the cosmos from, is more magnetically-energized, and more highly quantized, than Space. Thus, in my Model, Space is more etheric, and there is a disconnect between our earthbound setting and what is actually going on in Space, as opposed to what we assume is going on according to our basic understanding of how quantally-mediated phenomena behave when mostly-quantal forces are acting. It might be clearer if I use a specific example of how this disconnect manifests, specifically, the question of Time and how time can vary. -It is known that time can pass at different rates, for example, the rate time passes for a body in motion compared to a body at rest, or the rate time passes for a body in space, compared to the rate time passes near the earth's surface. -In my Ether Model, this is answered in the following way: Time is a rate, and reflects the rate of vibration of the elemental units comprising a body (see my sub model for the production of vibrational resonance for elemental ether units). -So when a body is in motion, its elemental energic units are resonating at an increased rate with the elemental units in the body's surroundings, which raises the vibratory rate of the elemental units in the body, and changes the rate of the passing of time for the body. (This type of rate change for time has been shown for atomic clocks.) -Similarly, if a body is in Space (in an orbiting satellite, for example), its elemental units are now resonating with the more-etheric, less energized/less quantized) elemental units in Space, the body's elemental vibratory rate slows, and the body's time rate slows. -In my Ether Model, the vibratory rate of a body's (say a clock's) elemental units is passed along to larger units via resonance: from elemental ether units to etheroidal units, then subatomic and atomic, and then to the (inertially energic) clock itself. Maybe this specific example of how this Ether Model is applied will make the Model clearer to my Opponent. Lastly, my Opponent cites the fact that there were repeated attempts later in time to refine the Michelson Morley Experiment (MMX), such as by Dayton Miller, and even Albert Michelson himself (who always maintained that he himself believed in the ether, although it had been his MMX that brought down the theory of an ether.) -From my perspective as an etherist, the "damage had already been done." It was the MMX itself which led to subsequent theories of the cosmos, such as Einsteinian General Relativity, which were predicated on the concept that the cosmos now had to be explained without the presence of a propagative ether medium. (One should also remember that in the time of the MMX, physicists believed that "solid particles" like electrons moved through space like throwing a baseball, and that electrons orbit atomic nuclei in neat discrete orbitals - concepts that even quantists today don't accept. Yet GR lives on... My Opponent might at this point cite observations such as gravitational lensing as support for GR. Yet bending of light from distant stars, around the Sun, can be explained with the Ether Model presented here. -When photonics are still in the neighborhood of the distant star, they are highly energized. Then (in my Ether Model) they resonate with photonic units in space (especially in the spatial pathway directed toward another star, such as our Sun), and those spatial photonics are much less energized than those near the distant star, so the star beam's units lose energy via resonating with the spatial photonics. Then, nearing our Sun, the starbeam's units once again encounter highly photonically energized units to resonate with, which "bends the beam" (as we see it from Earth.) -GR is not necessary to account for the lensing effect.