electromass vs. folding proteins

Has science taken a wrong turn? If so, what corrections are needed? Chronicles of scientific misbehavior. The role of heretic-pioneers and forbidden questions in the sciences. Is peer review working? The perverse "consensus of leading scientists." Good public relations versus good science.

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

Locked
KickLaBuka
Guest

electromass vs. folding proteins

Post by KickLaBuka » Mon Jul 13, 2009 5:13 am

Don’t celebrate yet.

The problem with aether plasma mechanics and with quantum electrodynamics is that it demands the probability of such interactions; a web-like set of choices. It guesses at the folding pattern. There exists a force which causes the folding to occur in a certain direction. Electromass predicts it by a change in configuration due to a forced flow. The flow is a first order differential equation. That Force is a second order differential equation. Its Field is a third order differential equation. That equals the magnetic binding field due to spinning charged-masses. This constitutes electromassive forces and this is where the electromass constant should be derived—from the postulations in the cosmology section of my book. The ability to predict protein synthesis is in the stars at Z=1.

If somebody has said that first, please inform me. But what I am suggesting about quantum electrodynamics and the aether is the following: These outside the box (but looking in) methods will be used as checks when comparing electromassive determinations to known wave functions to their structure. If you have to use a mathematical trick you learned in QM—or elsewhere, use it sparingly; and never to introduce a new force; and be reluctant with probabilities.

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests