A theory of three dimensional spacetime

[Uclock]

BenTheMan

Uclock. The first page of the first article you posted. I think your "space time constant" plays the role of Newton's constant.

Yes it plays a similar role as Newton’s universal gravitational constant because it relates gravity to any mass.

Any claims that you reproduce gravity without "Newton's constant" are only technically true. It's not called "Newton's constant" anymore because you renamed it.

What are you talking about? I have taken great pains in the paper to show how I came to the STC using the displacement of an object in a gravitational field and simple geometry. The fact that there is a relationship to ‘G’ via 2 pi is hardly surprising because both are dealing with gravity and mass but the STC is a direct relationship to displacement and mass and the retardation of time.
Why would I bother using an indirect relationship via 2 pi when I can have a direct link between gravity and mass? It would make no sense.

This took me five minutes to find. This is why I don't need to read your papers.

What do you mean you found it? I clearly state that they are related via 2 pi but if the correct drop test experiments are undertaken ‘G’ could be far more accurately calculated using TR to many decimal places via this relationship which is not possible any other way. If you cannot see this then you aren’t as good as I thought you were.

Tony

____________________________
This is the theory of True Relativity

____________________________________
Time dilation inside and outside gravity fields

____________________
Article on True Relativity

 

[Uclock]

Well it looks like BenTheMan will have to change his name to BenWasTheMan because it seems he has run away from the argument. Pity, for just a minute I thought he knew a bit about mainstream physics.

Tony

 

[Pete]

I suspect he's bored with the argument. Alternative cosmologies are a dime a dozen on Internet forums. Sometimes they're fun... but they're rarely gripping.

 

[BenTheMan]

I suspect he's bored with the argument. Alternative cosmologies are a dime a dozen on Internet forums. Sometimes they're fun... but they're rarely gripping.

Pete's got my back.

Uclock---untill you can explain how to supress Lorentz Violating effects in your theory to below the experimental limits, the discussion cannot continue. I don't need numbers, just a hand wavy argument would be good enough if it were correct. This is the least that you can do, to get "mainstream" physicists to listen to you.

 

[BenTheMan]

Yes it plays a similar role as Newton’s universal gravitational constant because it relates gravity to any mass.

This effectively kills one of your arguments, you realize this surely. The Newton constant can be derived from geometry.

Explain the Lorentz violations first.

 

[BenTheMan]

I have taken great pains in the paper to show how I came to the STC using the displacement of an object in a gravitational field and simple geometry. The fact that there is a relationship to ‘G’ via 2 pi is hardly surprising because both are dealing with gravity and mass but the STC is a direct relationship to displacement and mass and the retardation of time.

Newton's constant is also a geometric thing. You are rederiving newton's constant, naming it after yourself, and claiming discovery.

Next Stop: Cold fusion.