Breaktrough in Physics!

 Posts: 98
 Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2016 6:34 pm
 Location: Swiss
Breaktrough in Physics!
Dear Sirs,
Check this out. This is a breaktrough! Even bigger than Einstein's idea.
"Thomas Precession is the Basis for the Structure of Matter and Space"
from Preston Guynn
https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... _and_Space
This means that everything is light! And that I was on right path with my own crappy papers, ie;
https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... d_of_Light
Best Regards,
Jouni Jokela
Check this out. This is a breaktrough! Even bigger than Einstein's idea.
"Thomas Precession is the Basis for the Structure of Matter and Space"
from Preston Guynn
https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... _and_Space
This means that everything is light! And that I was on right path with my own crappy papers, ie;
https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... d_of_Light
Best Regards,
Jouni Jokela

 Posts: 98
 Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2016 6:34 pm
 Location: Swiss
Re: Breaktrough in Physics!
Here is the Abstract;
Einstein's theory of special relativity was incomplete as originally formulated since it did not include the rotational effect described twenty years later by Thomas, now referred to as Thomas precession. Though Thomas precession has been accepted for decades, its relationship to particle structure is a recent discovery, first described in an article titled "Electromagnetic effects and structure of particles due to special relativity". Thomas precession acts as a velocity dependent counterrotation, so that at a rotation velocity of 3 / 2 c , precession is equal to rotation, resulting in an inertial frame of reference. During the last year and a half significant progress was made in determining further details of the role of Thomas precession in particle structure, fundamental constants, and the galactic rotation velocity. In this article, these discoveries are described and proofs are provided, with results matching experimentally determined values to between eight and thirteen significant digits. Among the discoveries described and proven herein are 1) the observed galactic rotation velocity and elementary particle spin interact due to Thomas precession, 2) the basis for Planck's constant and quantized energy levels is Thomas precession, 3) the fine structure constant is a function of galactic rotation velocity and the maximum value of rotation velocity minus precession velocity. Also discovered and proven is that, due to the inertial frame of reference resulting from Thomas precession, distance and time, with units meters and seconds, within three dimensional space are sufficient to describe the structure of particles and their interactions. Einstein showed that energy is dependent on frame of reference with his equation E =γ mc2, and he formulated E = mc2 as rest energy. Proven herein is that particle mass and rest energy are functions of rotational velocity due to Thomas precession. These far reaching discoveries are all interrelated, and based in Thomas precession. The theory, models, and equations give results that match experimental data to very high
precision.

 Posts: 276
 Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2018 10:33 am
Re: Breaktrough in Physics!
Link= http://vixra.org/pdf/1810.0456v1.pdf
I dont understand STR GTR & precession etc. I had a quick read of the article. I didnt spend much time koz i see that it is hard core Einsteinology, ie probly complete krapp. I dont see how math can make precession (eg Mercury perihelion precession).
And i dont see how Einsteinology can be happy to keep invoking Lorentz LC when the LLC equation has a different basis to Eisteinian LC.
And LLC & ELC are both wrong anyhow. LLC neglects the slowing of light near mass. ELC neglects the aetherwind.
And when i look closely at LLC i can see that the LC must be slantindicular, not perpindicular. But if slants are either left or right (which i think might be so)(or praps close to so)(ie close to 50/50) then the nett LC is perpendicular (or nearly).
Anyhow this all got me thinking today re how LLC might be applied to rotation.
For observers we have 3 kinds of aberration. We hav many possible time dilations depending on kind of clock (i mean real TD not Einsteinian TD). We hav angle contraction (arising from LC). We hav an observer sitting spinning at the center of spinorbit. We can hav a spinning observer in orbit. There are lots of scenarios.
All are of little interest. What is of greater interest is how spin or orbit can somehow feed back & over time change the spinner's or orbiter's real motion, both within one cycle, or more to the point from cycle to cycle to cycle. Within one cycle is possible. From cycle to cycle is difficult, u hav too much symmetry going on, & symmetry means no overall change. Even my centrifuging of aether wont give precession if there is a lot of symmetry. But praps it will if spin axis aint aligned with orbit axis. Or if orbit is not circular. My brain hurts. I might come back to this later, praps knot.
I dont understand STR GTR & precession etc. I had a quick read of the article. I didnt spend much time koz i see that it is hard core Einsteinology, ie probly complete krapp. I dont see how math can make precession (eg Mercury perihelion precession).
And i dont see how Einsteinology can be happy to keep invoking Lorentz LC when the LLC equation has a different basis to Eisteinian LC.
And LLC & ELC are both wrong anyhow. LLC neglects the slowing of light near mass. ELC neglects the aetherwind.
And when i look closely at LLC i can see that the LC must be slantindicular, not perpindicular. But if slants are either left or right (which i think might be so)(or praps close to so)(ie close to 50/50) then the nett LC is perpendicular (or nearly).
Anyhow this all got me thinking today re how LLC might be applied to rotation.
For observers we have 3 kinds of aberration. We hav many possible time dilations depending on kind of clock (i mean real TD not Einsteinian TD). We hav angle contraction (arising from LC). We hav an observer sitting spinning at the center of spinorbit. We can hav a spinning observer in orbit. There are lots of scenarios.
All are of little interest. What is of greater interest is how spin or orbit can somehow feed back & over time change the spinner's or orbiter's real motion, both within one cycle, or more to the point from cycle to cycle to cycle. Within one cycle is possible. From cycle to cycle is difficult, u hav too much symmetry going on, & symmetry means no overall change. Even my centrifuging of aether wont give precession if there is a lot of symmetry. But praps it will if spin axis aint aligned with orbit axis. Or if orbit is not circular. My brain hurts. I might come back to this later, praps knot.

 Posts: 98
 Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2016 6:34 pm
 Location: Swiss
Re: Breaktrough in Physics!
Thanks for the comment. This "greater interest" of yours I understand as a how the entropy turns around and is feeded back to system.crawler wrote:Link= http://vixra.org/pdf/1810.0456v1.pdf
All are of little interest. What is of greater interest is how spin or orbit can somehow feed back & over time change the spinner's or orbiter's real motion, both within one cycle, or more to the point from cycle to cycle to cycle. Within one cycle is possible. From cycle to cycle is difficult, u hav too much symmetry going on, & symmetry means no overall change.
This is not thought at all in the papers of Preston Guynn. I have an idea, but It's so "huge" that it has taken me few years for my self to accept this view.
Entropy is turned around in Stars/Sun or in any object able to absorb enough radiation (Brown dwarf's, planets)
I wrote this paper before getting to know the Information provided by Preston;
https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... _revisited
And I now started this project to work this all out;
https://www.researchgate.net/project/So ... nogravity

 Posts: 98
 Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2018 7:26 pm
 Location: Goleta, CA
Re: Breaktrough in Physics!
I agree/concur on ideas of nomass and pushing force only. However through out TOE answers, there were many invoked contradictory force relationship that are attract/pull direction, e.g. bond, pull, electronproton, gluon, .. are implied pull kinetic, obviously kinetic is motion which only pushes.
Let's focus on one concept, where your TOE could elucidate  yeah make common sense in visual way.
Question 6.2  about manifestation/emergence of weak force come about (please ignore rare and decay aspects). Well, your answer was nonsensical.
Perhaps, let's eliminate nonanswers
1) nuclei persists in true/mathvacuum? can't persists, since entropy is eventual outward/radiation.
2) nuclei uptakes radiation from foreign sources? can't because foreign radiation has to perform 'work' against outgoing radiation from the nuclei. Repelling(push apart) behavior is easy to observe when push/fuse nuclei together.
3) A persisting high energy density volume (nuclei is a conglomerate of such volumes/structures) requires containment/container, what & how are mechanisms of this container? This bomb can't exists because any physics paradigms that based on current Newton's Law of Motions 100% failed to produce such container (or any sort of containment boundaries, imagine to visualize the sun different visible layers as containment boundaries).
4) Space is independent variable of speed. Therefore light speed doesn't affect space. We superimposed a math spatial axes (coordinate) on this independent volume as enable us to count via our number system. Space expand/contraction is just A way to eventfit real world physics into math  sure, it's useful but exceptions will growth larger with deeper examinations/observations.
...
So let's not even tackle conceptual object of multiplenucleon. How about simplifying the answer by explain container mechanism for a proton+ or single electron. Map this into math world and solve by just using push force and geometry while compliance to law of thermodynamics and Newton's 3rd law of motion? How many variables involved for construction of this container and what are they? force is always interacting in *pair* of direction => and opposite <= . Thus far, this *pair* destroyed/falsified whatever physics concepts out there that I've exposed/encountered.
Let's focus on one concept, where your TOE could elucidate  yeah make common sense in visual way.
Question 6.2  about manifestation/emergence of weak force come about (please ignore rare and decay aspects). Well, your answer was nonsensical.
Perhaps, let's eliminate nonanswers
1) nuclei persists in true/mathvacuum? can't persists, since entropy is eventual outward/radiation.
2) nuclei uptakes radiation from foreign sources? can't because foreign radiation has to perform 'work' against outgoing radiation from the nuclei. Repelling(push apart) behavior is easy to observe when push/fuse nuclei together.
3) A persisting high energy density volume (nuclei is a conglomerate of such volumes/structures) requires containment/container, what & how are mechanisms of this container? This bomb can't exists because any physics paradigms that based on current Newton's Law of Motions 100% failed to produce such container (or any sort of containment boundaries, imagine to visualize the sun different visible layers as containment boundaries).
4) Space is independent variable of speed. Therefore light speed doesn't affect space. We superimposed a math spatial axes (coordinate) on this independent volume as enable us to count via our number system. Space expand/contraction is just A way to eventfit real world physics into math  sure, it's useful but exceptions will growth larger with deeper examinations/observations.
...
So let's not even tackle conceptual object of multiplenucleon. How about simplifying the answer by explain container mechanism for a proton+ or single electron. Map this into math world and solve by just using push force and geometry while compliance to law of thermodynamics and Newton's 3rd law of motion? How many variables involved for construction of this container and what are they? force is always interacting in *pair* of direction => and opposite <= . Thus far, this *pair* destroyed/falsified whatever physics concepts out there that I've exposed/encountered.

 Posts: 98
 Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2016 6:34 pm
 Location: Swiss
Re: Breaktrough in Physics!
I agree with most of what you say. Thanks for the input, it helped me to develop this further;MotionTheory wrote:
1) nuclei persists in true/mathvacuum? can't persists, since entropy is eventual outward/radiation.
2) nuclei uptakes radiation from foreign sources? can't because foreign radiation has to perform 'work' against outgoing radiation from the nuclei. Repelling(push apart) behavior is easy to observe when push/fuse nuclei together.
3) A persisting high energy density volume (nuclei is a conglomerate of such volumes/structures) requires containment/container, what & how are mechanisms of this container? This bomb can't exists because any physics paradigms that based on current Newton's Law of Motions 100% failed to produce such container (or any sort of containment boundaries, imagine to visualize the sun different visible layers as containment boundaries).
4) Space is independent variable of speed. Therefore light speed doesn't affect space. We superimposed a math spatial axes (coordinate) on this independent volume as enable us to count via our number system. Space expand/contraction is just A way to eventfit real world physics into math  sure, it's useful but exceptions will growth larger with deeper examinations/observations.
https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... _connected

 Posts: 98
 Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2018 7:26 pm
 Location: Goleta, CA
Re: Breaktrough in Physics!
Once exit the fantasy realm of EM is self propagating (oh sure, I am currently levitating by lifting my own feet with my arms), particle waves (both T & L waves) require a medium for propagating energy via perturbation. Energy in Twave carries and transfer by the medium. Lwave energy also carries by the medium  once Newtonian/physicalreality think about this force (motion and transfer), *just ignore irrelevant(spacetime rubberband) nonforce form of special relativity energy representation.If this idea is true, then the Planck radiation
distribution law ceases to be true in Extremely low frequencies, and the observed <1 Hz
frequencies are actually particle waves instead of pure electromagnetic waves.
A 1Hz photon would has ridiculous high energy, since a wavelength spans c distance. And if photon in this case actually string of particles and particles travel at c speed, then these particles are moving many times faster than c along transverse sinusoidal path. This is a clear contradiction against observation where longer(low frequency) has less energy than shorter(high frequency) EM wave.
Wave is just a pattern, not a thing or string of things. So how motion of things form wave pattern? Perhaps start with whip on a rope  describing this interaction mechanism at femtometre resolution. Does this now has similar look to your 1Hz photon? If all brains spend infinity lifetime trying to solve this using current fundamental physics, failure is guarantee!

 Posts: 98
 Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2016 6:34 pm
 Location: Swiss
Re: Breaktrough in Physics!
Definetly not. It would have the energy according to the planck;MotionTheory wrote: A 1Hz photon would has ridiculous high energy, since a wavelength spans c distance.
E=hf
also in the order of h (planck constant) 6,26 x 10^34
It's just that this radiation intensity is highly exponential because almost nothing absorbs these.
A 10 hz photon can interact with matter and end up to be a 9 hz photon with a changed direction etc. But the 1 Hz doesn't change direction or enything. So there is some 1,5 x 10 ^10 time more of these 1 Hz photons than ie 10 Hz photons,
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests