Unifield Field candidate - the way is open

[pogono]

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.

 

[AlphaNumeric]

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.

 

[Mars Rover]

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.

 

[Mazulu]

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?

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.

 

[origin]

.

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.

 

[Mars Rover]

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

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

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.

 

[pogono]

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?

 

[AlphaNumeric]

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?

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.

 

[Mazulu]

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.

 

[rpenner]

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?

 

[Mazulu]

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.

 

[AlexG]

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:

 

[Neverfly]

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.

 

[Cheezle]

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.

 

[brucep]

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.

 

[Mazulu]

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.

 

[Neverfly]

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

HEY! I resent that.

 

[AlphaNumeric]

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.

 

[Tach]

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.

 

[Mazulu]

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?