# Sylwester's 'Everlasting theory'

You can call me a "beastie boy". OK with me. BTW, I've been called worse . . . by friends.

Very impressive.

The Special Theory of Relativity (SR) and General Theory of Relativity (GR) are logically inconsistent because of the assumption that the relativistic mass is not real. Then the rest mass of a particle in all frames of reference is the same so clocks are going the same and can be synchronized.

The Scale-Symmetric Theory (SST) shows that the relativistic mass is sometimes real - it is not real when, for example, recessional velocities of a galaxy cluster and the local dark energy are the same. The real relativistic mass causes that internal structure of clocks changes so they can not be synchronized via the Lorentz Transformation.

The logical inconsistency causes that the SR length contraction and the GR time dilation for radii close to the Schwarzschild radius are invalid.

But SST shows that the other SR formulae are correct because sometimes we can neglect internal structure of clocks and interactions of clocks with dark energy and assume that observer is in the rest in relation to the expanding dark energy. For example, the formula for relativistic mass of a particle accelerated in LHC is correct so the energy-momentum relation is also because it can be derived from the formula for relativistic mass (see my last paper).

Last edited:
The Special Theory of Relativity (SR) and General Theory of Relativity (GR) are logically inconsistent because of the assumption that the relativistic mass is not real. Then the rest mass of a particle in all frames of reference is the same so clocks are going the same and can be synchronized.
Your inability to understand relativity does not mean there's a problem with it.

Your inability to understand relativity does not mean there's a problem with it.

Ble, ble, ble,...
It is impossible to discuss with you because of lack of any scientific arguments.

Below is the link to my new paper (4 pages)

http://vixra.org/abs/1703.0139

Gravitational Time Dilation for a Free-Fall on Neutron Black Hole

Abstract
Within the Scale-Symmetric Theory (SST) we showed that for a free-fall on neutron black hole (NBH), the relativistic mass is real so synchronization of clocks via the Lorentz Transformation is logically inconsistent.

To obtain correct formula for gravitational time dilation, instead of using the Lorentz Transformation, we must start from the law of conservation of spin.

Near and inside the Schwarzschild surface the gravitating grainy Einstein spacetime (ES) inspirals towards the centre of NBH (the ES leaks from NBH via the NBH jets). It causes that near the Schwarzschild surface down to the surface of NBH (its equatorial radius is two times smaller than the Schwarzschild radius) the time dilation does not follow from pure radial motions but from orbital motions as well.

We showed that time practically stops when vector sum of orbital and radial velocities of freely falling body is close to the velocity of light in “vacuum” c.

Due to the inspiralling ES, the trajectory of the body is deflected from the radial direction but trajectories of a freely falling initially radial photon and the body do not overlap. The inspiralling ES causes that for a distant observer, the radial speed on the Schwarzschild surface of a freely falling body is lower than c.

For radii smaller than the equatorial radius of NBH, time is going as in frame of reference in the absolute rest - it follows from the fact that inside NBH both NBH and ES have the same angular velocities.

Below is the link to my new paper (3 pages)

http://vixra.org/abs/1703.0154

Absurd Accusations that the Special Theory of Relativity is, Generally, Logically Inconsistent

Abstract
It is obvious that the Special Theory of Relativity (SR) applies only to systems containing physical inertial reference systems, each equipped with a physical clock initially synchronized with other clocks. This leads to the conclusion that it is easy to prove that SR is logically inconsistent when we try to describe, via SR, a system in which listed above two conditions, i.e. inertia and initial synchronization, are simultaneously not satisfied.

Here we described the initial conditions which must be satisfied to obtain a system composed of physical inertial reference systems with initially synchronized physical clocks.

In previous papers we showed why SR sometimes leads to formulae which do not concern Nature - it applies to the SR contraction in length and phenomena in which, apart from radial velocities automatically appear, due to flows in the Einstein spacetime, transverse velocities also.

Below is the link to my new paper (2 pages)

http://vixra.org/abs/1703.0161

New Observational Data Verify the Evolution of Massive Galaxies

Abstract
New data based on observations obtained at the Very Large Telescope (VLT) of the European Southern Observatory (ESO), Paranal, Chile, lead to conclusion that baryons in the early Universe efficiently condensed at the centres of dark matter halos when dark matter was less concentrated. It means that we must solve following cosmological problem: Was there a sufficiently long period during the mainstream Big Bang for concentration of baryonic matter, partially separated from dark matter, to create the discs of massive galaxies in very early Universe?

Here we showed that new data are consistent with the evolution of massive galaxies presented within the Scale-Symmetric Theory (SST). The main features are as follows.

The expansion of the Universe was separated in time from the inflation.

The return shock wave after the inflation created the cosmic structure which looked as very big quasar (the Protoworld).

Inside the torus of the Protoworld were created massive protogalaxies with supermassive black holes in their centres.

Due to a phase transition of the Protoworld, its torus and supermassive central black hole transformed into dark matter.

Only then there were the inflows of dark matter and dark energy into the baryonic protogalaxies.

Below is the link to my new paper (4 pages)

http://vixra.org/abs/1703.0216

Universal Law for Flat Rotation Curves of Galaxies

Abstract
The Scale-Symmetric Theory (SST) shows that the spinning cosmic loops built of the entangled Einstein-spacetime (ES) components, with centres overlapping with centres of galaxies, are the basic dark-matter (DM) structures. Their interactions with baryonic matter via weak interactions of leptons lead to the flat rotation curves of galaxies.

Here, applying such mechanism, we derived universal law that relates actual baryonic masses of galaxies with radial accelerations of stars at a critical radius (for radii bigger than such radius, there dominates the baryon-DM interaction).

We calculated as well a parameter at a critical scale that is consistent with observational data.

We need to change our ideas about dark matter.

______________________

Below is the link to my new paper (2 pages)

http://vixra.org/abs/1703.0215

Polarization of Spins of Galaxies in Cosmic Filaments

Abstract
New data suggest that the initial period of evolution of galaxies should be modified.

Here, on the basis of the cosmology described within the Scale-Symmetric Theory (SST), we explain in a very simple way why spins of massive galaxies are, generally, perpendicular to cosmic filaments whereas of dwarf galaxies are, generally, tangential to them.

It's actually really sad, this pet theory of yours will probably continue to remain on this forum and in your mind for the rest of life, never making any rapid strides to the top of the physics community. Have you even tried getting this into some form of peer review rather than the fanfic physics journal that is vixra? Heck, ever few days and weeks you post a new article you made up. Has the physics community admitted that you are the next Einstein and are dropping their shit to bow at your heels or have you done nothing but stay on the internet for a myriad of years, what strides have you been recognized for?

You have been posting shit for over five years and I haven't seemed to see any progress? I guess pet theories don't pay the bills, especially when very rarely anyone takes them seriously.

You have been posting shit for over five years and I haven't seemed to see any progress? I guess pet theories don't pay the bills, especially when very rarely anyone takes them seriously.
Anti-stupidity: I find your comments regarding Sylwester derogatory and insulting, and very likely contrary to Sciforums rules. Grow up and discuss respectfully! . . . . Thanks!

Anti-stupidity: I find your comments regarding Sylwester derogatory and insulting, and very likely contrary to Sciforums rules. Grow up and discuss respectfully! . . . . Thanks!

You are right. Hatred should not be tolerated. Thank you.

Below is the link to my new paper (4 pages)

http://vixra.org/abs/1703.0262

Masses of the Five New Narrow States of Neutral Charmed Omega Baryon Calculated Within the Atom-Like Structure of Baryons

Abstract
The phase transitions of the inflation field, which are described within the Scale-Symmetric Theory (SST), lead to the atom-like structure of baryons.

Here, within such a model, we calculated mass of the charged charmed Xi baryon (2467.89 MeV) and mass of neutral one (2468.51 MeV).

We calculated also mass of ground state of the neutral charmed Omega baryon (2949.02 MeV) - it is below the threshold mass (2961.61 MeV) for the decay to charged charmed Xi (2467.93) and charged kaon (493.68 MeV), and we calculated masses of the five new narrow states of the neutral charmed Omega baryon with a mass of 2949.02 MeV: 3000 MeV (it is the ground state above the threshold mass), 3051 MeV, 3067 MeV, 3084 MeV, and 3118 MeV. We showed as well that there should be a structure around 3186 MeV.

Within presented here model, we calculated mass of the charm quark (1276.4 MeV).
______________

BTW
Is it possible to calculate above listed masses within the Standard Model (SM) with the same very high accuracy as in SST? Can such calculations be coherent, simple and without free parameters as it is in SST? I think that within SM it is impossible because SM is the incomplete theory. Within SM, we for more than 5 decades can not calculate many fundamental quantities as, for example, spin of nucleons or their exact masses. The mainstream theories do not lead to the origin of the dark matter and dark energy and to their abundances. I claim that without SST, we never will be able to solve the tens unsolved basic problems. But it is very difficult for scientific community to admit that some parts of SM and GR are incorrect. How long we will deceive the whole world?

Notice that when experimental data do not fit SM or GR (for example, some narrow resonances or superluminal neutrinos) then they “disappear”. Can the narrow excited states of the neutral charmed Omega baryon “disappear” also? They should not.

I am waiting for calculations within the Standard Model of the narrow excited states of the neutral charmed Omega baryon.

Last edited:
How long we will deceive the whole world?
I hope for many years to come. I do not believe that mankind is ready for your theory. There is some knowledge that is just too powerful for our current state of evolution.

I hope for many years to come. I do not believe that mankind is ready for your theory. There is some knowledge that is just too powerful for our current state of evolution.

It is very strange why physicists and cosmologists do no try to understand why very simple theory leads to hundreds theoretical results consistent with experimental data. There do not appear free parameters and such theory solves all fundamental problems. In my opinion, it is due to the correct and complete initial conditions - they cause that physics is the very simple field of knowledge. But scientific community wrongly assumed that physics describing the lowest level of Nature must be very, very complicated. It is not true.

The very messy theoretical particle physics and theoretical cosmology follow from the facts that scientists do not understand correctly internal structure of spacetime and bare particles. Correct theory of them causes that physics becomes very simple as it is in the Scale-Symmetric Theory.

It is very strange why physicists and cosmologists do no try to understand why very simple theory leads to hundreds theoretical results consistent with experimental data. There do not appear free parameters and such theory solves all fundamental problems. In my opinion, it is due to the correct and complete initial conditions - they cause that physics is the very simple field of knowledge. But scientific community wrongly assumed that physics describing the lowest level of Nature must be very, very complicated. It is not true.

The very messy theoretical particle physics and theoretical cosmology follow from the facts that scientists do not understand correctly internal structure of spacetime and bare particles. Correct theory of them causes that physics becomes very simple as it is in the Scale-Symmetric Theory.
Well, good luck on you endeavors.

Below is the link to my new paper (8 pages)

http://vixra.org/abs/1704.0055

The Cosmological Constant Problem, the CMB Mass of Neutrinos, Quasars, Stable Vacua, and Non-Existence of Pure Energy as the Keys to the New Physics

Abstract
The cosmological constant problem is a serious problem in particle physics and cosmology so a solution to this problem should lead to new physics. The value of cosmological constant is about 120 orders of magnitude too low than it should be. Here we showed that today the vacuum energy is about 119 orders of magnitude lower than it should be (in the Planck units or as a dimensionless quantity) because the superluminal pure inertial energy (it means that the gravitational energy is equal to zero) is frozen inside the stable-neutrinos/gravitational-charges and is about 119 orders of magnitude higher than the indirectly observed gravitational energy.

We showed here that geometric mean of the Planck mass of neutrinos and the very low particle mass of neutrinos leads to the CMB/cosmological mass of neutrinos observed in experiments. The vice versa should be correct as well so the Planck mass and the sum of the experimental CMB/cosmological masses of different neutrinos lead to the very low particle mass of neutrinos so it leads to new physics as well.

The Planck mass of neutrinos, which is associated with maximum rotation of their spin, solves the hierarchy problem as well.

Quasars (a torus with a central condensate), which are the objects with high gravitational-mass density, can be the big cousins of the gravitational charge but of the weak and electromagnetic charges also. In the Scale-Symmetric Theory (SST), such a structure is characteristic for bare fermions – such a structure radically simplifies theories in particle physics and cosmology. The similarity of different scales leads to new physics also.

There are two stable vacua (Higgs field and Einstein spacetime) so the physical constants are invariant.

Pure energies, i.e. without inertial mass or inertial and gravitational masses, are not in existence.

Below is the link to my new paper (7 pages)

http://vixra.org/abs/1704.0358

Lepton Flavour Non-Universality from the Scale-Symmetric Theory

Abstract
In recent years, LHCb has found hints of deviations from the Standard-Model (SM) predictions that point new physics (NP). The lepton flavour universality is violated when comparing rates of decays of B mesons into excited kaon and lepton-antilepton pair with different flavours.

Here, applying the Scale-Symmetric Theory (SST), we calculated the ratio of such decay rates when there appears a pair of muons or electron-positron pair. In the low-squared-q region (0.045 < qq < 1.1 GeV^2/c^4)), we obtained ratio = 0.6603 and in the central-squared-q region (qq > 1.1), we obtained ratio = 0.6850. The SST results are consistent with the central values obtained in the LHCb experiments 0.660 and 0.685 respectively. We can compare the LHCb and SST results with the SM predictions that give values close to unity. The SM results are inconsistent with the LHCb data having a statistical significance of 2.2 - 2.5 sigma.

We showed that the decrease from about 1 in SM to 0.6603 in SST follows from different structure of muon and electron and from creation of additional electron-positron pair near bare muon, whereas the increase in SST from 0.6603 to 0.6850 is a result of the weak interactions of a pair of muons with nucleon at q higher than some threshold energy equal to 1.05 or 1.06 GeV/c^2 i.e. the squared q should be higher than about 1.1.

We do not need a heavy Z’ boson or leptoquarks to explain the deviations from SM - we need a lacking part of SM i.e. we need the SST which is the NP.

___________________________________

Below is the link to my new paper (4 pages)

http://vixra.org/abs/1704.0359

Do We See the Equivalence Principle in Its True Aspect?

Abstract
The interaction of the non-gravitating Higgs field with an inertial mass, due to the fifth force, resulting from the dynamic viscosity of the inertial mass and Higgs field, causes the inertial mass to be surrounded by non-gravitating/inertial gravitational field which is the gradient in the Higgs field. Such gravitational clothing does not result in the appearance of a new mass type commonly referred to as gravitational mass.

Since there is only one kind of mass, that is inertial mass, so the challenge is not to answer the question of why the inertial and gravitational masses are the same. The challenge is to answer why the gravitational constant G does not depend on the internal structure of bodies - this is the fundamental problem of the Equivalence Principle.

Here we justify that the invariance of the gravitational constant is due to the fact that the second component of spacetime, i.e. the Einstein spacetime, and all bodies consist of inertial masses-charges having invariant inertial mass. Interactions such as gravity, electromagnetism, weak interactions, and nuclear strong interactions can not change the mass of the inertial masses-charges - they can only change their number in the system under consideration. The same concerns the quantum entanglement which is a result of simultaneous exchanges of the same parts of the inertial masses-charges.

In formula ma = GMm/(rr), M and m are the inertial masses, not some gravitational masses, whereas G depends on properties of Higgs field and dynamic viscosity of it and indirectly of the invariant masses-charges. The inertial masses-charges produce only the invariant negative gradients in the Higgs field so gravitational force is always attractive.

Below is the link to my new paper (2 pages)

http://vixra.org/abs/1705.0017

Asymmetric Decays of Neutral Kaons and B Mesons as False Evidences of the Matter-Antimatter Asymmetry

Abstract
It is assumed that the asymmetric decays of neutral kaons and B mesons make an absolute distinction between matter and antimatter. Such asymmetric decays were observed in collisions of nucleons only. There are not experiments in which kaons and B mesons are produced in collisions of antinucleons only.

Here, applying the Scale-Symmetric Theory (SST), we showed that internal helicity of created neutral kaons (according to SST, relativistic neutral kaon is a constituent of neutral B meson also) depend on internal helicity of colliding particles - nucleons are internally left-handed whereas antinucleons are right-handed.

SST shows that there should not be some distinctions between decays of neutral kaons and B mesons created in collisions of matter only and in collisions of antimatter only.

In reality, the matter-antimater asymmetry does not follow from different behaviour of matter and antimatter in weak interactions but from the external left-handedness of the initial inflation field. It caused that at the end of inflation there appeared more nucleons than antinucleons. Next, the return shock wave, carrying the additional nucleons, created the early Universe.
___________________________

BTW,

1.
Scientists search for neutrinoless double-beta decay signals, i.e. they try to know whether two electron-antineutrinos can annihilate - if it is possible then neutrinos could be the Majorana fermions (then neutrinos are their own antiparticles), not Dirac fermions.

On the other hand, the SST shows that neutrinos are the Dirac fermions so the neutrinoless double-beta decay signals never will be detected. Moreover, neutrino-antineutrino pairs of the same flavour of the components cannot annihilate also because the electron-neutrinos and muon-neutrinos are the very stable objects and no one force in the Universe can destroy them (the tau-neutrino is the electron-neutrino-like neutrino composed of three different neutrinos: electron-neutrino plus muon-neutrino--muon-antineutrino pair). It is due to the irreversible processes during the inflation. Just we should not observe some quanta from annihilations of neutrino pairs.

The neutrino “oscillations” are due to the interactions of the neutrinos under consideration with the Cosmic Neutrino Background (CNB) and with the Einstein spacetime which components are the neutrino-antineutrino pairs.

SST shows that if some particle decays to one neutrino only (for example, neutron) then the neutrino is inside the particle all the time. Due to the weak interactions, the Einstein-spacetime components can decay to single neutrinos.

2.
I showed within SST that there is only one type of mass, i.e. inertial. The same concerns the two different mechanics. Within SST we showed that quantum mechanics emerged from classical mechanics after the inflation. We can show that due to the superluminal quantum entanglement, which has the classical origin and which cannot be fully controlled (!), classical behaviour of Nature is seen by observer as quantum behaviour. Just Einstein was right.

3.
Recent results show that a supervoid between source of the CMB and observer is unlikely to explain a “Cold Spot” in the CMB within standard cosmological theory. This and a few other cosmological anomalies lead to some precursor of the early Universe - it is consistent with the SST cosmology but is inconsistent with the mainstream cosmology.
Some scientist claims that the Cold Spot in CMB is due to collision of universes - I think that author of this idea “drove the band”.
There is as well an idea that the Cold Spot could be the imprint of another universe caused by quantum entanglement between universes before they were separated by the inflation.

4.
Within SST, contrary to the Standard Model, it is easy to show why at higher energies there appear more strange particles than expected. Majority of particles are produced due to the atom-like structure of baryons outside their core. But the strange particles, such as kaons, are produced inside the core of baryons which is practically indestructible. At higher energies, some part of the atom-like structure of baryons is destroyed so abundance of kaons at higher energies should be higher than expected.