Hello all,

my article with Unified Field description candidate has been published:
scirp.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?paperID=17700

Moreover...,
soon will appear an article written by some other physicist/mathematician, who make citation of mine, confirms my results and generalize my equations using Killing vector fields (and Gauss-Codazzi equation).

You may find draft of this article here:
tp-theory.net/eng/proof-theory.html

He confirms f.e. what I have shown:
- we may consider reference frame assigned to photon!! (if we use Killing observers)
- we may derive GR equations using Rindler's transformation on flat Minkowski space-time what digs a tunnel between General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics

Have a good reading
pogono

We have an alternative theories section for stuff like this. I'm unfamiliar with the journal you have your work in so I can't pass comment on its quality. What's your publication history? I ask because if you've just jumped from nothing to publishing a claim of a unified field theory it raises eyebrows.

Moving to AT until such time as the competency of the claims are established, I don't have the time or the inclination right now to do so myself.

We have an alternative theories section for stuff like this. I'm unfamiliar with the journal you have your work in so I can't pass comment on its quality. What's your publication history? I ask because if you've just jumped from nothing to publishing a claim of a unified field theory it raises eyebrows.


Nice to meet you, AlphaNumeric.

At first let me say, it is not some alternative theory.
General Relativity is right, QM is right. Mainstream is right.

In my article I only show (for Schwarzschild solution) that we may consider gravity - completely correctly mathematically - as accelerated flat Minkowski space-time and we obtain the same formulas that comes from General Relativity. Photon trace (geodesics) appears to be effect of regular Rindler's transformation...

Next physician (Kuroneko, in second link) confirms my work, and generalize my formulas with Killing vector fields (mathworld.wolfram.com/KillingVectors.html) that is essentially the same framework than GR use, but now considered for Killing observers reference frames.

Conclusion:
I have just shown, that we may consider gravity by accelerated photons!
I also show, how to construct temporary reference frame for photons!

Ok, I know, I know... it sounds ridiculous, but check it by yourself!
It is simply math. I have red in your profile that you know some math.

But wait... It means that we may consider accelerated wave. So, may be it means => "accelerated wave function"?

Since De Broglie (and then Schrödinger and Dirac) we do not imagine gravity other way, then just another quantum interaction. Higgs describes it this way. Now, we may consider accelerated photon! We do not need "the mass" anymore.

I appreciate if someone will develop it farther with Lie Algebra.
I did my work.

P.S.
You may check my background on my web page.
I won few awards for innovation and wrote few important publications in my life.

I noticed in the abstract of your article you refer to time-space as the medium for wave propagation. Is there a particular reason for stating time-space rather than the more usual space-time?

I totally agree with the point of view that there must be a medium for wave propagation and I have tried to develop this idea further at:

http://www.btinternet.com/~richard.lewis41/Space/Space.htm

Harmony

I noticed in the abstract of your article you refer to time-space as the medium for wave propagation. Is there a particular reason for stating time-space rather than the more usual space-time?

It comes from my language. In polish we say time-space. :-)

Below I put short explanation what is the point in the first two sections of the article.

As you may read in first section (2.1. Schwarzschild Metric and Time Dilation) while considered locally, photons appears to be accelerated according to regular Rindler's transformation.
But when you make whole calculations, at the end you obtain curved time-space (Schwarzschild metric) with constant photon's speed equal "c".

Conclusion: photons may be considered as accelerated, but even accelerated - they still have "c" speed. Instead photon's velocity increase you obtain time-space curvature increase.

In next section of my document (2.2. Vector Fields for Minkowski Time-Space) I explain why we get such strange result. Why we see so strong relation between photon's behaviour and time-space curvature.

"It is proved, there is no aether and time-space is the only medium for electromagnetic wave. However, considering time-space as the medium we may expect, there should exist field equations, describing electromagnetic wave as disturbance in time-space structure (disturbance in medium) propagating in the time-space (propagating in medium)".

I derive such field equations.
Electromagnetic wave IT IS moving disturbance in time-space structure.

It comes from my language. In polish we say time-space. :-)

Below I put short explanation what is the point in the first two sections of the article.

As you may read in first section (2.1. Schwarzschild Metric and Time Dilation) while considered locally, photons appears to be accelerated according to regular Rindler's transformation.
But when you make whole calculations, at the end you obtain curved time-space (Schwarzschild metric) with constant photon's speed equal "c".

Conclusion: photons may be considered as accelerated, but even accelerated - they still have "c" speed. Instead photon's velocity increase you obtain time-space curvature increase.

In next section of my document (2.2. Vector Fields for Minkowski Time-Space) I explain why we get such strange result. Why we see so strong relation between photon's behaviour and time-space curvature.

"It is proved, there is no aether and time-space is the only medium for electromagnetic wave. However, considering time-space as the medium we may expect, there should exist field equations, describing electromagnetic wave as disturbance in time-space structure (disturbance in medium) propagating in the time-space (propagating in medium)".

I derive such field equations.
Electromagnetic wave IT IS moving disturbance in time-space structure.

I don't know what to say in other people's threads. You can't agree, you can't disagree. If I was to be precise like Spock I would say "Interesting, I agree with you in some respects." And if I was to just be scientific I would say "I agree with you 75%". But if I was to be honest I would say that I want to correct you on a few things but I am not allowed to as your theory is using relativity in some respects, which puts my ideas in a different category.

I don't know what to say in other people's threads. You can't agree, you can't disagree. If I was to be precise like Spock I would say "Interesting, I agree with you in some respects." And if I was to just be scientific I would say "I agree with you 75%". But if I was to be honest I would say that I want to correct you on a few things but I am not allowed to as your theory is using relativity in some respects, which puts my ideas in a different category.

Pincho this thread is in Alternative Theories, so you can post comments, disagree etc. as long as it does not become trolling or just diverting the tread completely. The guidelines are not asnstrict as in Physics and Math....

Pogono, In your article section 2.2 you state: "As we know there is no ether and the medium for electromagnetic wave is time-space." When the Michelson-Morley experiments were performed they were looking for a medium for the propagation of electromagnetic waves including light waves. I agree with you that there must be a medium for wave propagation but saying that there is no ether seems to be a question of what name we give to the medium. I say this just to test my understanding of your picture of reality.

I also agree with your conclusions that an electromagnetic wave is a moving disturbance in the time space structure. I also take the view that particles with non-zero rest mass such as the electron and proton are looped wave disturbances in the space-time structure. This makes sense when it is considered that electrons emit photons and so must be of the same type of energy.

Harmony

When the Michelson-Morley experiments were performed they were looking for a medium for the propagation of electromagnetic waves including light waves.

Yes, I know MMX experiment. But they were looking for some additional medium. Something that acts like air or water (in time-space).

I state - if there is no additional medium, then just time-space is the medium.
So photon is disturbance in time-space structure propagating in this structure.

Quite obvious, now. Isn't it? :-)

Cheers
pogono

Yes, I know MMX experiment. But they were looking for some additional medium. Something that acts like air or water (in time-space).

I state - if there is no additional medium, then just time-space is the medium.
So photon is disturbance in time-space structure propagating in this structure.

Quite obvious, now. Isn't it? :-)

Cheers
pogono

The Michelson and Morley experiments were looking for evidence of a specific definition of "the ether" of the day. It was completely consistent with Newtonian space and ridgely fixed, in the background. The luminiferous ether was essentially a solid that did not interact with matter and yet provided the medium for the propagation of light and other EM waves. They did not prove that the ether or an ether did or does not exist. The experiments returned "null" results, which means they failed to detect any motion of the Earth relative to the medium, not that there was or is no medium.

Any conceptualization of an ether consistent with the definition and ideas of the 1800's is inconsistent with almost everything we have come to know about the universe in the last 100 years. This does not mean that there is no medium, space, or spacetime if you like, is a medium for the propagation of EM radiation, photons. One of the big differences is that, as general relativity is incorporated into our understanding of the universe, both space and spacetime, become dynamic.., no longer a static solid fixed in the background, and no longer confined to the restrictions of Newton's conceptualization of space and time.

The ether of today is essentially spacetime and rather than being completely transparent to the motion of matter, it interacts at least weakly with matter. That interaction results in a dynamic curvature of spacetime we associate with gravitation and the Lense-Thirring or frame-dragging effect.., and allows for the propagation of electromagnetic fields and photons.

While using the word "ether" carries a great deal of baggage and almost always elicits negative reactions from most of the mainstream science community, there is no real funtional difference in the way theorists think of spacetime.

The real difference today is definition, nature and characteristics of the empty space within which both matter and EM radiation exists and/or propagates. In many ways spacetime is the new terminology used to refer to the ether, without the negative baggage, that old ideas and concepts raise for the lay public.

Conclusion:
I have just shown, that we may consider gravity by accelerated photons!

- - -

Since De Broglie (and then Schrödinger and Dirac) we do not imagine gravity other way, then just another quantum interaction. Higgs describes it this way. Now, we may consider accelerated photon! We do not need "the mass" anymore.



I agree with the post by OnlyMe regarding the ether and the medium of space-time.

Pogono, I would just like to ask some questions about the earlier post - extracts quoted above.

I do not understand the advantage of accelerated photons to explain gravity. It seems to me that gravity is explained by General Relativity which asserts that mass curves space-time and the movement of mass is affected by space-time curvature. The key question seems to be "How does mass curve space-time?" and if we could explain how an electron curves space-time then this explanation would extend to all particles and to all matter. Then there would be no need for any further explanation of gravity.

I have been working on this approach at:
http://www.btinternet.com/~richard.lewis41/Space/Space.htm

Harmony

Next physician (Kuroneko, in second link) confirms my work,<snip>

Danger, Will Robinson!

Physicists do physics. Physicians are doctors.

Danger, Will Robinson!

Physicists do physics. Physicians are doctors.

:eek: :)
Looks like too fast spell checking issue :)
Thank you.

I do not understand the advantage of accelerated photons to explain gravity. It seems to me that gravity is explained by General Relativity which asserts that mass curves space-time and the movement of mass is affected by space-time curvature. The key question seems to be "How does mass curve space-time?"

Hi Harmony, hello all
by considering acceleration of photons with Rindler's transformation we obtain curved space-time as the result. Its calculated in my article.

I have prepared brief explanation of my articles for non-physicists. You may find it at: www.dilationasfield.net/eng

Have a nice reading :-)

Regards
pogono

Hi Harmony, hello all
by considering acceleration of photons with Rindler's transformation we obtain curved space-time as the result. Its calculated in my article.

I have prepared brief explanation of my articles for non-physicists. You may find it at: www.dilationasfield.net/eng

Have a nice reading :-)

Regards
pogono

Hi Pogono, I have read the article at the link titled 'Dilation as a field' and one sentence stood out from the first page:
"So, we may expect, there exist some field equations, describing electromagnetic wave as:
- disturbance in space-time structure propagating in the space-time, what is:
- disturbance in medium propagating in the medium."

I completely agree with this description and I would like to share with you my additional thoughts regarding the problem of the unification of physics.
I have felt for some time that the unification of physics can only be accomplished if the correct world view or physical description is deduced as a first step.

I have set out these ideas in http://home.btconnect.com/richardlewis41/Space/Unification.htm

I have some conceptual difficulty with your idea of accelerated photons but I am impressed that you have been able to work through the mathematical analysis to show an equivalence with curved spacetime.

Regards
Harmony

This 8-page paper meanders and immediately makes one suspect the author has no experience in these matters.

In this paper we also refer to Max Planck’s Natural Units introduced in 1899. Let us then denote following designnations:
\begin{array}{ll} t_{\tiny P} & \textrm{Planck's time}\\ l_{\tiny P} & = c t_{\tiny P} \\E_{\tiny P} & = \frac{\hbar}{t_{\tiny P}} = \frac{l_{\tiny P} \cdot c^4}{G}\, \textrm{Planck's Energy} \\ \hbar & = \frac{h}{2 \pi} = E_{\tiny P} \cdot t_{\tiny P} \, \textrm{reduced Planck's action} \end{array} Not for the last time does the author state a proportionality only to solve it on the next line. c is inconsistently assumed to equal 1 and then explicitly used. Clearly beyond his expertise, he ignores general relativity and talks about the Schwarzschild solution and then mangles the metric to talk about "geodesics". (Before equation 11 he means null geodesics but the journal editors didn't catch this.) Equation 14 doesn't follow from anything introduced prior to it. And then the paper slides downhill from there.

This 8-page paper meanders and immediately makes one suspect the author has no experience in these matters.
Not for the last time does the author state a proportionality only to solve it on the next line. c is inconsistently assumed to equal 1 and then explicitly used. Clearly beyond his expertise, he ignores general relativity and talks about the Schwarzschild solution and then mangles the metric to talk about "geodesics". (Before equation 11 he means null geodesics but the journal editors didn't catch this.) Equation 14 doesn't follow from anything introduced prior to it. And then the paper slides downhill from there.
Rpenner,
The problem with your comment is that those who are experienced with mathematics, GR & QM are not pushing physics to the next level: gravity field generators. You and Alphanumeric are just finding morer complicated ways to express Newtonian gravity. This is safe for you, but not terribly useful to humanity. The apex of safe physics is the global positioning system. I used it last month when they closed some streets. GPS is less useful then the stapler I use every day. I use a paperclip about as often as I use GPS. GPS is the grand acheivement of safe physics. Oh, and GPS could be used to drop an ICBM on any target within inches of the pre-programmed coordinates.

Why don't you use your experience in QM and GR to come up with an experiment that attempts to curve space-time using light? The idea of accelerating photons, without changing their velocity, is the precursor to the gravity drive. That's called: INNOVATION. Where is your innovation?

Rpenner,
The problem with your comment is that those who are experienced with mathematics, GR & QM are not pushing physics to the next level: gravity field generators. You and Alphanumeric are just finding morer complicated ways to express Newtonian gravity. This is safe for you, but not terribly useful to humanity. The apex of safe physics is the global positioning system. I used it last month when they closed some streets. GPS is less useful then the stapler I use every day. I use a paperclip about as often as I use GPS. GPS is the grand acheivement of safe physics. Oh, and GPS could be used to drop an ICBM on any target within inches of the pre-programmed coordinates.

Why don't you use your experience in QM and GR to come up with an experiment that attempts to curve space-time using light? The idea of accelerating photons, without changing their velocity, is the precursor to the gravity drive. That's called: INNOVATION. Where is your innovation?

DARPA does put funding into exploring the idea and potential of anti-gravity drives. See, http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=darpa-casimir-effect-research.

It is not like no one thinks that it is not worth putting funding into the concept. It is an issue of where funding may return some reasonable expectaion of results, even where those results may not include a successful gravity propulsion system.

As a disclaimer, I think DARPA also put money into the exploration of psychic abilities to be used as weapons. So DARPA funding in and of itself, should be taken with a grain of salt.

DARPA does put funding into exploring the idea and potential of anti-gravity drives. See, http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=darpa-casimir-effect-research. It is not like no one thinks that it is not worth putting funding into the concept. It is an issue of where funding may return some reasonable expectaion of results, even where those results may not include a successful gravity propulsion system. As a disclaimer, I think DARPA also put money into the exploration of psychic abilities to be used as weapons. So DARPA funding in and of itself, should be taken with a grain of salt.
Actually, it was the Casimir effect that strongly influenced my "aether medium made of waves" idea. From the article,

Vacuums generally are thought to be voids, but Hendrik Casimir believed these pockets of nothing do indeed contain fluctuations of electromagnetic waves.

I don't know how much luck their going to have make antigravity by using two plates. My idea was to use one plate (antenna/emitter) that emits an EM linear chirp repeatedly so that it looks like gravitational redshift. I think that is the right strategy to exert a curvature in space-time.

As for training psychics as weapons, I agree, it's a stupid idea. That's like training normal people to act trollish. Why do we need more bad people in the world?

As for training psychics as weapons, I agree, it's a stupid idea

Is that what the Aliens telepathically told you?

This 8-page paper meanders and immediately makes one suspect the author has no experience in these matters.
Not for the last time does the author state a proportionality only to solve it on the next line. c is inconsistently assumed to equal 1 and then explicitly used. Clearly beyond his expertise, he ignores general relativity and talks about the Schwarzschild solution and then mangles the metric to talk about "geodesics". (Before equation 11 he means null geodesics but the journal editors didn't catch this.) Equation 14 doesn't follow from anything introduced prior to it. And then the paper slides downhill from there.

Hello rpenner, nice to meet you.
I confirm that my first article was containing editorial mistakes, however there was no math error in it.

Take a look at my newest article: www.dilationasfield.net/gaiws.pdf

In section "3.3. Rindler’s transformation" it is much clearer explained. You may see, that I do:

1. Take regular Rindler transformation used to describe accelerating body by temporary co-moving bodies.
Equations: (42), (43)

2. Put in place of velocity and acceleration:
- free-falling velocity
- gravitational acceleration
Equation: (44)

3. Then I transform the formula according to regular math rules
Equations: (45), (46)

4. Then, I write regular Minkowski for this temporary co-moving body and stationary observer (47)

5. Surprise! We got null geodesics equation in Schwarszchild metric for stationary observer (he is called Killing observer in GR)
Equation (48)

So, we have to agree, that we were considering photon acceleration. However, photon did not get accelerated. Instead of its acceleration - spacetime get curved.

Do it by yourself.
Otherwise you will never believe it works.

The problem with your comment is that those who are experienced with mathematics, GR & QM are not pushing physics to the next level: gravity field generators.There's a difference between not pushing the boundaries and not just making crap up. If I said to a biologist "You aren't pushing the boundaries : Unicorns!" they'd say "Can you please provide some evidence such a thing is a reasonable use of my time?". You've failed to justify any of your claims. Yes, it would be nice if we had gravity generators, warp drive, teleporters, instant neural communication, cybernetic replacements for aging body parts, but we can't just jump to such things if they are utterly lacking in any base in reality.


You and Alphanumeric are just finding morer complicated ways to express Newtonian gravity.You have no idea what I do.


This is safe for you, but not terribly useful to humanity. The apex of safe physics is the global positioning system. I used it last month when they closed some streets. GPS is less useful then the stapler I use every day. I use a paperclip about as often as I use GPS. GPS is the grand acheivement of safe physics. Oh, and GPS could be used to drop an ICBM on any target within inches of the pre-programmed coordinates.Firstly, why are you the yardstick by which something is evaluated? I don't use insulin so can I therefore conclude insulin is a worthless invention of science? I don't use any of the wave guide things you work with, so can I conclude your work is pointless? Of course not.

Secondly, we are surrounded by the achievements of physics. GPS, electronics, satellites, nuclear power, aeroplanes, electricity grids, microwaves, lasers, light bulbs, fridges, MRI scanners, cars. Name any piece of technology and there's some physics in there. It's ironic you're complaining about the lack of achievements in 'safe physics' over the internet, a global telecommunications network linking electronic devices together using laser based fibre optics, microwave transmitters, satellites, etc which contains pretty much the sum of all human knowledge. Did you know one of the recent Nobel Prizes, to do with a particular magnetic effect, now forms the basis of modern hard drives? Probably not. You don't seem interested in honest enquiry, you just complain how other people can't doing the things you want them to do.

Tell you what, when you can do the work you keep telling others they should be doing then you can complain about innovation and what people spend their time doing. You cannot provide a single iota of evidence for your claims, you cannot provide a single working model of anything in the real world, you've showing you're woefully ignorant of the current models. Hell, you've shown you don't even understand signal generators properly and its your job! You might call what we do 'safe physics' but what you do isn't physics at all.


Why don't you use your experience in QM and GR to come up with an experiment that attempts to curve space-time using light? The idea of accelerating photons, without changing their velocity, is the precursor to the gravity drive. That's called: INNOVATION. Where is your innovation?Innovation and just making stuff up without reason or evidence are not synonymous. As for innovation I'm sure I've done more of it in my short time as a scientist than you have managed in your entire life. Notice I don't call you a scientist, seeing as you aren't one. I could tell you some of my innovations, including a number of highly practical ones within the aerospace industry, but confidentiality clauses and all that.

AlphaNumeric. Let's not forget that many of those advances started out as blind experiments which later formalized the results into an expanded technical research programs to come up with those inventions.

Yes, wouldn't it be nice to have an LHC to investigate unknowns. Wait, we have one, and it is investigating unknowns hoping for something to show up. Even if that something was not predicted or does not fit with present theory.

Exciting blind experiments are not to be sneezed at no matter how far we have come from Rutherford, Faraday or the ancient alchemists.

There's a difference between not pushing the boundaries and not just making crap up. If I said to a biologist "You aren't pushing the boundaries : Unicorns!" they'd say "Can you please provide some evidence such a thing is a reasonable use of my time?".
lol They could probably bioengineer a unicorn if they really wanted to.

You've failed to justify any of your claims. Yes, it would be nice if we had gravity generators, warp drive, teleporters, instant neural communication, cybernetic replacements for aging body parts, but we can't just jump to such things if they are utterly lacking in any base in reality.
Just treat the space-time continuum as a medium. That would imply that it has other properties that we haven't thought of. It should lead an openmind to an experiment. Obviously there is some relationship between gravity and frequency shift (called gravitational redshift). Innovation would tell you to try it in reverse. It's just like with solenoids and magnets. Applying current causes the magnet to move; likewise, moving the magnet causes a current. The same kind of dual causal relationship should exist with gravity and frequency shift.


You have no idea what I do.
Embed pencils in the ceiling tiles would be my guess.

Firstly, why are you the yardstick by which something is evaluated? I don't use insulin so can I therefore conclude insulin is a worthless invention of science? I don't use any of the wave guide things you work with, so can I conclude your work is pointless? Of course not.

Secondly, we are surrounded by the achievements of physics. GPS, electronics, satellites, nuclear power, aeroplanes, electricity grids, microwaves, lasers, light bulbs, fridges, MRI scanners, cars. Name any piece of technology and there's some physics in there. It's ironic you're complaining about the lack of achievements in 'safe physics' over the internet, a global telecommunications network linking electronic devices together using laser based fibre optics, microwave transmitters, satellites, etc which contains pretty much the sum of all human knowledge. Did you know one of the recent Nobel Prizes, to do with a particular magnetic effect, now forms the basis of modern hard drives? Probably not. You don't seem interested in honest enquiry, you just complain how other people can't doing the things you want them to do.
Jesus Christ! I want a frickin' warp drive. What does it take to get that?:mad:

Tell you what, when you can do the work you keep telling others they should be doing then you can complain about innovation and what people spend their time doing. You cannot provide a single iota of evidence for your claims, you cannot provide a single working model of anything in the real world, you've showing you're woefully ignorant of the current models. Hell, you've shown you don't even understand signal generators properly and its your job! You might call what we do 'safe physics' but what you do isn't physics at all.
OK you're getting defensive. I don't want to upset you. All I'm saying is that if you treat space-time like a nothingness and GR is the last word, then where do you go from there? But if you treat space-time like a thing with properties, then the Einstein equations are probably not the whole picture. There could be other things that effect space-time geometry as well.

Innovation and just making stuff up without reason or evidence are not synonymous. As for innovation I'm sure I've done more of it in my short time as a scientist than you have managed in your entire life. Notice I don't call you a scientist, seeing as you aren't one. I could tell you some of my innovations, including a number of highly practical ones within the aerospace industry, but confidentiality clauses and all that.
Good for you! :) And may you receive a deeper understanding of gravity drives and hyper-drives.

.

Exciting blind experiments are not to be sneezed at no matter how far we have come from Rutherford, Faraday or the ancient alchemists.

The problem is that we are talking about bat-shit crazy experiments.

Edited to add. And said experiments were inspired by telepathic aliens.:rolleyes:

The problem is that we are talking about bat-shit crazy experiments.

Edited to add. And said experiments were inspired by telepathic aliens.:rolleyes:

Oh. I see. But even allowing for that, how is the experiment itself any different from any other blind or silly experiment carried out by many famous scientists of the past who believed in god (eg Newton) and said they were inspired by god or their ancestor spirits or whatever turned them on? Does it matter what batshit crazy reason is given to pursue an idea or experiment? I have no idea or comment on the particulars, only the principle of being allowed to try whatever turns you on as far as eccentric ideas and experiments go. Otherwise not really interested. Adios amigos.

Take a look at my newest article: www.dilationasfield.net/gaiws.pdf

In section "3.3. Rindler’s transformation" it is much clearer explained.
(...)

So, any substantive comment?

Just treat the space-time continuum as a medium. That would imply that it has other properties that we haven't thought of. It should lead an openmind to an experiment. Obviously there is some relationship between gravity and frequency shift (called gravitational redshift). Innovation would tell you to try it in reverse. It's just like with solenoids and magnets. Applying current causes the magnet to move; likewise, moving the magnet causes a current. Do you honestly think that consitutes a justification? Have you ever even been in the same zip code as a science book? Waffling and arm waving is easy, you can say anything. The details are essential, they cannot be just made up like you constantly do. For example, it's easy to say "Quantum mechanics is consistent with general relativity" but when you do the details you find they aren't.

You talk about innovation and an open mind but you have no idea what either of those things are. Innovation, real innovation which makes people sit up and listen, in science doesn't come about by just making vapid claims and telling others they should be innovative. A naive, ignorant mind is not an open mind. Being deluded and accepting anything you just pull out of thin air without structure or reason isn't being open minded, it's being a deluded idiot.


JThe same kind of dual causal relationship should exist with gravity and frequency shift. 'Should'? And what precisely are you basing 'should' on? 'Should' means you think there's a high probability it is the case, that it's reasonable to expect such a thing. Where's your evidence? Where's the details of your logic and reasoning? Where's your models of the relevant physical phenomena which lead to such conclusions? Nowhere. It's like someone saying "When you die you should meet Jesus". Should? Not 'should' but rather "I firmly believe, without evidence or reason or rigour, this thing and I cannot consider the notion I might be just making stuff up".

You complain about open minds yet you've closed your mind to the possibility you're utterly wrong, which is ironic considering your complaints about the supposed behaviour of people like myself and przyk within the research community.


Embed pencils in the ceiling tiles would be my guess. I'll give you an example. Today I was at a particular large (multi-billion dollar) aerospace company, presenting to them a completely new approach to solving a significant physics problem they have. An approach I did in its entirety myself, to a problem they and another multi-billion dollar company had tried and failed to get anywhere with. Several engineering applications are already being discussed for further development, to bring it to practical implementation, as well as modifications to apply to other areas of engineering quite unrelated to the original problem. This is not the first time I've been in such a situation either. And that's just part of what I spent my time doing in the last few months. Somewhat more productive than embedding pencils into ceiling tiles. I take pride in my work.


Jesus Christ! I want a frickin' warp drive. What does it take to get that?:mad:So what you're saying is because you want something to be true you assert it to be true so much that eventually you believe it to be true. That's called deluding yourself. I'd like to solve all sorts of science problems but I'm not going to do it by just asserting "I have solved them!". Instead it's going to take a lot of time and effort to even make a dent in some of the things.


All I'm saying is that if you treat space-time like a nothingness and GR is the last word, then where do you go from there? Where did I say anything of the sort? Here's a clue : nowhere.


There could be other things that effect space-time geometry as well. And there's something I've never denied.


Good for you! :) And may you receive a deeper understanding of gravity drives and hyper-drives.And maybe biologists will gain a better understanding of unicorns. You talk about it as if it's certain to be true, which is just as bad as what you think is being said about GR, that it's the last word. Asserting you know a theory is true is something no competent scientist would do yet it's something so many hacks say about their own claims.


OK you're getting defensive. I don't want to upset you.I'm neither defensive nor upset. I'm somewhat exasperated by your dishonesty and apathetic hypocrisy. You tell scientists how science is to be done, when you clearly cannot do it yourself. You talk about open minds when you don't have you. You assert things about reality you have no information on nor experience working with. Hell, you can't even use basic equipment relevant to your own job properly! You've demonstrated you like to tell people what they should be doing and how they should be doing it when you are failing to meet such standards/requirements yourself. When I see a good engineer/scientist lamenting about some sad state of affairs within the research community then I am happy to discuss such things, since there's plenty of things to be complained about in that regards, but when I see someone I wouldn't even consider rational or even familiar with the basic principles of science making all the ridiculous statements you do I find it somewhat contemptible. You're happy to tell me what I should be doing but you're unwilling (and it would seem incapable) of doing similar levels of effort yourself. I'm not being defensive because I have nothing to be defensive about, you aren't in any way, shape or form 'threatening' or shaking my view of science. If anything you're reminding me why it's important people like pryzk and myself do what we do, it clearly is a task which cannot be left to people such as yourself.

Do you honestly think that consitutes a justification? Have you ever even been in the same zip code as a science book? Waffling and arm waving is easy, you can say anything. The details are essential, they cannot be just made up like you constantly do. For example, it's easy to say "Quantum mechanics is consistent with general relativity" but when you do the details you find they aren't.

You talk about innovation and an open mind but you have no idea what either of those things are. Innovation, real innovation which makes people sit up and listen, in science doesn't come about by just making vapid claims and telling others they should be innovative. A naive, ignorant mind is not an open mind. Being deluded and accepting anything you just pull out of thin air without structure or reason isn't being open minded, it's being a deluded idiot.

'Should'? And what precisely are you basing 'should' on? 'Should' means you think there's a high probability it is the case, that it's reasonable to expect such a thing. Where's your evidence? Where's the details of your logic and reasoning? Where's your models of the relevant physical phenomena which lead to such conclusions? Nowhere. It's like someone saying "When you die you should meet Jesus". Should? Not 'should' but rather "I firmly believe, without evidence or reason or rigour, this thing and I cannot consider the notion I might be just making stuff up".

You complain about open minds yet you've closed your mind to the possibility you're utterly wrong, which is ironic considering your complaints about the supposed behaviour of people like myself and przyk within the research community.

I'll give you an example. Today I was at a particular large (multi-billion dollar) aerospace company, presenting to them a completely new approach to solving a significant physics problem they have. An approach I did in its entirety myself, to a problem they and another multi-billion dollar company had tried and failed to get anywhere with. Several engineering applications are already being discussed for further development, to bring it to practical implementation, as well as modifications to apply to other areas of engineering quite unrelated to the original problem. This is not the first time I've been in such a situation either. And that's just part of what I spent my time doing in the last few months. Somewhat more productive than embedding pencils into ceiling tiles. I take pride in my work.

So what you're saying is because you want something to be true you assert it to be true so much that eventually you believe it to be true. That's called deluding yourself. I'd like to solve all sorts of science problems but I'm not going to do it by just asserting "I have solved them!". Instead it's going to take a lot of time and effort to even make a dent in some of the things.

Where did I say anything of the sort? Here's a clue : nowhere.

And there's something I've never denied.

And maybe biologists will gain a better understanding of unicorns. You talk about it as if it's certain to be true, which is just as bad as what you think is being said about GR, that it's the last word. Asserting you know a theory is true is something no competent scientist would do yet it's something so many hacks say about their own claims.

I'm neither defensive nor upset. I'm somewhat exasperated by your dishonesty and apathetic hypocrisy. You tell scientists how science is to be done, when you clearly cannot do it yourself. You talk about open minds when you don't have you. You assert things about reality you have no information on nor experience working with. Hell, you can't even use basic equipment relevant to your own job properly! You've demonstrated you like to tell people what they should be doing and how they should be doing it when you are failing to meet such standards/requirements yourself. When I see a good engineer/scientist lamenting about some sad state of affairs within the research community then I am happy to discuss such things, since there's plenty of things to be complained about in that regards, but when I see someone I wouldn't even consider rational or even familiar with the basic principles of science making all the ridiculous statements you do I find it somewhat contemptible. You're happy to tell me what I should be doing but you're unwilling (and it would seem incapable) of doing similar levels of effort yourself. I'm not being defensive because I have nothing to be defensive about, you aren't in any way, shape or form 'threatening' or shaking my view of science. If anything you're reminding me why it's important people like pryzk and myself do what we do, it clearly is a task which cannot be left to people such as yourself.

You are too caught up in your own superiority that a conversation with you would be of no use. Try not to step on the little people.

You are too caught up in your own superiority that a conversation with you would be of no use. Try not to step on the little people. Spoken like one who brought no facts or workable ideas to the debate, doesn't value workable ideas or actual descriptions of reality, and is insanely jealous of the respect science gets relative to mediums, ghost whisperers and others that claim weird things talk to them in weird ways.

But was it really necessary to quote all of AlphaNumeric's post when you don't respond to any point he raises?

I'm neither defensive nor upset. I'm somewhat exasperated by your dishonesty and apathetic hypocrisy. You tell scientists how science is to be done, when you clearly cannot do it yourself. You talk about open minds when you don't have you. You assert things about reality you have no information on nor experience working with. Hell, you can't even use basic equipment relevant to your own job properly! You've demonstrated you like to tell people what they should be doing and how they should be doing it when you are failing to meet such standards/requirements yourself. When I see a good engineer/scientist lamenting about some sad state of affairs within the research community then I am happy to discuss such things, since there's plenty of things to be complained about in that regards, but when I see someone I wouldn't even consider rational or even familiar with the basic principles of science making all the ridiculous statements you do I find it somewhat contemptible. You're happy to tell me what I should be doing but you're unwilling (and it would seem incapable) of doing similar levels of effort yourself. I'm not being defensive because I have nothing to be defensive about, you aren't in any way, shape or form 'threatening' or shaking my view of science. If anything you're reminding me why it's important people like pryzk and myself do what we do, it clearly is a task which cannot be left to people such as yourself.
Alphanumeric,
I want to honor your blessing from the Higher Power that you are able to explore the universe with mathematics. It is a beautiful gift that you have been given this lifetime. I hope it brings you much joy. I also feel blessed that I was able to understand some of the mystery as well. I got to see and experience how the aether medium is what carries the characteristics of light; it is what makes light possible. I got to see how it makes space-time geometry possible. This medium is mathematically described by wave-functions (solutions to the Schrodinger equation). Simultanously, this medium is the reason why the speed of light is a constant for all inertial frames. It is because the very essence of this medium is a wave that has permitivity and permeablity build into it. It is this medium that allows virtual photons, real photons, electromagnetic fields, it allows particles with mass to exist. These medium, as an infinitely vast collection of aether waves, causes distance and separation to exist physically. These same waves have frequency (cycles per second) built into them and cause physical time to exist. Best wishes with that.

I got to see and experience how the aether medium is what carries the characteristics of light; it is what makes light possible. I got to see how it makes space-time geometry possible

The Aliens are sending you visions? :runaway:

Alphanumeric,
I want to honor your blessing from the Higher Power that you are able to explore the universe with mathematics. It is a beautiful gift that you have been given this lifetime. I hope it brings you much joy. I also feel blessed that I was able to understand some of the mystery as well. I got to see and experience how the aether medium is what carries the characteristics of light; it is what makes light possible. I got to see how it makes space-time geometry possible. This medium is mathematically described by wave-functions (solutions to the Schrodinger equation). Simultanously, this medium is the reason why the speed of light is a constant for all inertial frames. It is because the very essence of this medium is a wave that has permitivity and permeablity build into it. It is this medium that allows virtual photons, real photons, electromagnetic fields, it allows particles with mass to exist. These medium, as an infinitely vast collection of aether waves, causes distance and separation to exist physically. These same waves have frequency (cycles per second) built into them and cause physical time to exist. Best wishes with that.
It's sad that you took what he said and then reversed it as a validation of your efforts.

The truth can hurt Mazulu. And you just threw a shield up.

It is almost as if you're defensive of your own personal value. In order to validate having value, you seek value out even if it is based on fantasy. You've absorbed yourself into the fantasy world and lost touch with base reality. So even when it's put right in front of you, I don't think you can see it even if you actually wanted to.

And what A.N. and others, including myself, pointed out- it's needless. You do not need this fantasy in order to validate yourself. You have a keen intellect, a sharp wit and talent- the tragedy is in watching it go to waste.

I do not expect you will read this post and say, "By Golly! He's right!"

But foolishly, I do hope that you will start to open your mind up to investigative research. Maybe, over time, you will begin to come around and start using your brain in a productive manner to contribute and not waste your mind.

Alphanumeric,
I want to honor your blessing from the Higher Power ...

Mazulu, you are the ultimate science reverse barometer. What ever you say about science is a sure deal that the opposite is true. Your religious beliefs are probably making some faithful believers cringe. Between the aliens and etherial spirits, you are the ultimate reason to NOT believe. Keep up the good work. Everything you say is enough to push a borderline believer into atheism.

Mazulu, you are the ultimate science reverse barometer. What ever you say about science is a sure deal that the opposite is true. Your religious beliefs are probably making some faithful believers cringe. Between the aliens and etherial spirits, you are the ultimate reason to NOT believe. Keep up the good work. Everything you say is enough to push a borderline believer into atheism.

Since Mazulu is having a problem delivering the aliens message it would be interesting if the alien wrote some posts for Mazulu and spoke to us using mathematical physics. They may want to go home some time.

Since Mazulu is having a problem delivering the aliens message it would be interesting if the alien wrote some posts for Mazulu and spoke to us using mathematical physics. They may want to go home some time.
When you look in the mirror, do you see a mathematical description of your face? Or do you just see your face? When you drive, do you see mathematical descriptions of cars, pedestrians and the road? Or do you just see cars, pedestrians and roads? I will grant you that before we can utilize gravity drive technology to build hyper-drives and stuff, we'll need a good mathematical framework. But you can build a mathematical framework once you've performed enough experiments. But do you know what experiment(s) to perform?

The aliens don't really care if we get gravity drives right away. I'm sure they really don't want Cheezle, Alphanumeric and Neverfly showing up in their solar system like bad neighbors trampling the daisies. Sometimes I think the only reason they gave me the knowledge was so that I could do nothing more than taunt you "professional physicists" with it; if you ignore me, that's good for them.

Space-time is a "something", not a "nothing". It is a "something" that has distance and time built into it using the precursor to EM frequency, the aether wave. To curve space-time (without the stress energy tensor), all you have to do is represent an artificial curvature using the wavelength of electromagnetic fields. That artificial curvature will have its effect on space-time in the form of an acceleration field.

But you guys know what you're doing. :p

Neverfly showing up in their solar system like bad neighbors trampling the daisies.

HEY! I resent that.

You are too caught up in your own superiority that a conversation with you would be of no use. You're the one claiming you know how things work. What's the matter, don't like having your delusions exposed? I'm more than happy to talk about gravity etc with people but I like my discussions informed and rational, not filled with delusions of grandeur and assertions without basis, which is all you can manage.

Funny how you complain about my supposed superiority complex. I demonstrate my capabilities, I don't have to assert I know how things work, I can demonstrate it. You've shown you can't even use equipment related to your job! I love my job and I'm good at it. That isn't just me saying it, I get told it by others. Sorry if you think someone demonstrating competence amounts to a superiority complex, I guess you're not used to scientific competency, else you'd not have the nonsensical viewpoints you have.


Try not to step on the little people.If you can justify your claims you have nothing to worry about, the justification would speak for itself. Instead you assert things because you want them to be true, rather than because you can show them to be true. Why do I ridicule that? Because it's ridiculous. I wish I had a billion dollars/pounds/euros. Does that make it so? Should I go around acting like I have a billion dollars? Of course not, that would be ridiculous.

You're trying to convince yourself you're right, without evidence or reason, and in doing so convince yourself it's okay you know nothing about mainstream science because you know how it really works, right? I explained how I'm not getting defensive, I just think you're ridiculous. Actually I think your mentality is rather pathetic, I find wilful personal incredulity to be abhorrent. You've convinced yourself your ignorance is okay because you just know how things are and you know how things are because that's how you want things to be. That is the very definition is delusional.


I want to honor your blessing from the Higher Power I got to where I am today by hard work, time and effort. You should try it some time instead of waiting for your man in the sky to give you a helping hand. Here in the UK a lot of churches have signs outside them saying "Try praying". My response is "Try getting off your backside and putting in some bloody effort". I suggest you try that.


It is a beautiful gift that you have been given this lifetime.You speak as if you know there'll be 'other lifetimes'. Yet another of your "I want it to be try so I'll act like it is" things?


I also feel blessed that I was able to understand some of the mystery as well. I got to see and experience how the aether medium is what carries the characteristics of light; it is what makes light possible. I got to see how it makes space-time geometry possible. This medium is mathematically described by wave-functions (solutions to the Schrodinger equation). Simultanously, this medium is the reason why the speed of light is a constant for all inertial frames. It is because the very essence of this medium is a wave that has permitivity and permeablity build into it. It is this medium that allows virtual photons, real photons, electromagnetic fields, it allows particles with mass to exist. These medium, as an infinitely vast collection of aether waves, causes distance and separation to exist physically. These same waves have frequency (cycles per second) built into them and cause physical time to exist. Best wishes with that.None of which you can justify, none of which you have any evidence for, none of which you can demonstrate any working understanding of, none of which you have any reason to say other than delusions.

Don't for a second think that you deciding one day that you know things makes it true or makes it in any way comparable to people who actually put in the time and effort to understand such things. You have shown you don't know what the scientific method is, what hard work means, what rational means, how various parts of reality work, what justification means or even how science plays a role in our everyday lives. You are staggeringly ignorant of all of those things. Wherever you went to school unfortunately failed to give you a good education and you're making it worse by, quite frankly, having delusions about yourself. The fact you say I have a superiority issue yet you can say all of the above quote not only without a single nano-iota of evidence but actually tons of evidence against you shows you have delusions of superiority. If I have any superiority issues at least they have a basis in reality, it seems only none of your beliefs have anything to do with reality; your views about god, yourself and science are almost completely wrong or unjustified or both.

So, any substantive comment?

Yes, a crackpot paper , written by a crank, published in a "journal" that publishes any crap as long as the author pays 600$ for publication. You landed in "Alternative Theories" for a good reason.

If I have any superiority issues at least they have a basis in reality, it seems only none of your beliefs have anything to do with reality; your views about god, yourself and science are almost completely wrong or unjustified or both.
So I'm not allowed to have views about God because, in your opinion, they are unjustified? Who are you to tell me what kind of views I should have about God? What kind of whack job are you?

What kind of whack job are you?

I probably am not speaking only for myself when I wonder when we will get the next big revelation of your odd belief system. Here is what we have so far.
1) gravity beams by flashing LEDS or RF chirps.
2) telepathic communication with space aliens.
3) luminiferous aether that creates multiple dimensions (space and time etc) and universes.
4) etherial spirits, ghosts and even culturally appropriate theme parks in heaven.
5) you belong to some spiritualist church/organization. Belief in spirit mediums (not just of the aether type).

So Mazulu, what is next? Why make us wait? Let it all out. You know you want to.

I know it is not anything we can imagine.

So Mazulu, what is next? Why make us wait? Let it all out. You know you want to.I know it is not anything we can imagine.
OK, I'll play. Eventually the physics community will get around to trying gravitational redshift in reverse using rapid and repeated linear frequency chirps. Give it two or three centuries and human beings will have limited hyper-drive capability. The good news is that humans will travel beyond the solar system to other solar systems. Gravity manipulation will be integrated into the shipping and transportation industry. This will bring the cost of shipping way way down. This will lead to a new level of prosperity for the USA, Japan, China and India and other nations with semiconductor technology and production facilities. Gravity drive technology will lead to unimaginable international benefits. But it will come at a price. Gravity drive technology has a dark side. As experiments are performed that attempt to manipulate the space-time continuum, there will be accidents. Some experiments will cause space-time to become unstable which will lead to loss of equipment and possibly loss of life. There will also be the threshold experiment that generates a gravity field so strong that it produces an event horizon. If done correctly, this is the key to breaking free of space-time and entering hyperspace; just don't stand to close. There will also be the problem of creating a navigational software program; one or two warp-drive capable spaceships that will never be heard from again because their navigational software made a mistake. So bring lots of food and don't trek too far too fast.

There will also be another potential problem. As human beings begin to probe and manipulate the fabric of space-time, it will effect adjacent universes with similar but somewhat different laws of physics; some with intelligent life forms. As we probe and disturb their plane of existence, they will feel justified in exploring our plane of existence as well. The day will come when respected scientists are the ones who are abducted by alien intelligences, and questioned. The respectability of the scientific community will collide with the strangest and most bizarre elements of UFOlogy and kookdom.

My, my - lots of imagination, too bad there's not even a remote shred of science anywhere in it.

OK, I'll play. Eventually the physics community will get around to trying gravitational redshift in reverse using rapid and repeated linear frequency chirps. Give it two or three centuries and human beings will ...

Well, that all goes without saying. That is the obvious scenario once humans embrace your gift of frequency shifting aether wave gravity beam technology. But what I meant, was was other stuff do you believe in. I think I can put 2 and 2 together and take a stab at some of your other beliefs that you have not mentioned.

1) The alien you communicate with through telepathy is dead or somehow transcended. When you put the spiritualism together with the UFOs that is the obvious answer. And this is not your average joe six-pack space alien, this is a highly advanced spiritual being, even for space aliens (who tend to me very spiritual). A good medium is seldom interested in an average spirit. Maybe you should write up a little introduction to your alien friend, who he is, where he came from, what he wants.

2) The way to true understanding of physics is to abandon mathematics and logic. Those are useless for true understanding of the foundations of reality. They are blocking our advancement. The one true way is intuition or visualization through meditation. Often a person new to meditation may need some assistance in the form of some higher frequency vibrational device. Often crystals but may include some kind of geometric design. And lots of candles and perhaps drums.

3) Often these spiritualist churches take parts of all the other religions and mash them altogether into a New Age spritualism. A place where UFOs and messiahs and great teachers from all over the world unite in a kind of Justice League and Star Federation combined. Often for us westerners, the central figure is Jesus Christ and he is in command of some UFO mothership. He is bound by the spiritual laws of the galactic UN. Is your alien friend an officer in this galactic, universal, or perhaps even trans-dimensional organization?

So did I hit the mark on any of these?

I also have an idea that might help you bridge your ideas to the more mathematically inclined and less spiritually evolved. You should design a Ouija board that includes the symbols used in math equations. Then the spirits could guide your hand to the proper formulae for explaining your ideas on these forums. Yes, I know that maths are not the true way, but as a bridge of understanding to us lesser spiritually developed beings it could help.

Well, that all goes without saying. That is the obvious scenario once humans embrace your gift of frequency shifting aether wave gravity beam technology. But what I meant, was was other stuff do you believe in. I think I can put 2 and 2 together and take a stab at some of your other beliefs that you have not mentioned.

1) The alien you communicate with through telepathy is dead or somehow transcended. When you put the spiritualism together with the UFOs that is the obvious answer. And this is not your average joe six-pack space alien, this is a highly advanced spiritual being, even for space aliens (who tend to me very spiritual). A good medium is seldom interested in an average spirit. Maybe you should write up a little introduction to your alien friend, who he is, where he came from, what he wants.

2) The way to true understanding of physics is to abandon mathematics and logic. Those are useless for true understanding of the foundations of reality. They are blocking our advancement. The one true way is intuition or visualization through meditation. Often a person new to meditation may need some assistance in the form of some higher frequency vibrational device. Often crystals but may include some kind of geometric design. And lots of candles and perhaps drums.

3) Often these spiritualist churches take parts of all the other religions and mash them altogether into a New Age spritualism. A place where UFOs and messiahs and great teachers from all over the world unite in a kind of Justice League and Star Federation combined. Often for us westerners, the central figure is Jesus Christ and he is in command of some UFO mothership. He is bound by the spiritual laws of the galactic UN. Is your alien friend an officer in this galactic, universal, or perhaps even trans-dimensional organization?

So did I hit the mark on any of these?

I also have an idea that might help you bridge your ideas to the more mathematically inclined and less spiritually evolved. You should design a Ouija board that includes the symbols used in math equations. Then the spirits could guide your hand to the proper formulae for explaining your ideas on these forums. Yes, I know that maths are not the true way, but as a bridge of understanding to us lesser spiritually developed beings it could help.

There are lots of books on the subject. But you are getting a bit off topic.

There are lots of books on the subject. But you are getting a bit off topic.

If we are off topic it is because you take us there. Every thread that you comment in, you change it into a debate on aether wave gravity beams. You really should stop that. Your mind is one track. And it looks like you have been warned. I will try and be more respectful of others like this guy that started this thread. He deserves a his due.