New Unified Force Theory Predicts Measured Values of Physics
#1
Posted 05 June 2006 - 02:43 AM
In February 2002, Thomson was observing a peculiar setup of a Tesla coil and noticed what appeared to be two distinctly different manifestations of charges. Not finding an adequate explanation for why charge should take on two different forms, Thomson decided to re-examine the foundations of quantum physics. Within three weeks, he discovered the simple, empirically based equations, which produce the Unified Force Theory. "This new model of quantum existence does not change the laws of Quantum Mechanics, it merely changes our view of quantum structure," Thomson said.
"I placed an ad on my website for someone to develop the mathematics for a Unified Field Theory based upon the Aether," said Bourassa. "David said he not only could do it, but already had." Since then, they joined together to form QADI, a registered 501©3 non-profit research organization devoted to the development and dissemination of the Aether Physics Model, published Secrets of the Aether, a book about the theory, and released a new white paper that summarizes the theory, A New Foundation for Physics, which is available online at www.16pi2.com/files/NewFoundationPhysics.pdf.
Infinite Energy Magazine will be publishing the white paper this fall. "We just received our first acknowledgement," said Thomson. "Because we are self-educated and this revolutionary discovery about the mathematics and geometry of the space-time fabric is not coming from a well-known scientific organization, it has been slow to gain acceptance, despite the stunning results the theory produces," he continued. The fabric of space-time Thomson refers to is the ubiquitous Aether, long discarded by modern science. According to Albert Einstein's Special Relativity theory, there cannot be a rigid Aether, as envisioned by Albert Michelson. However, Thomson and Bourassa's quantified Aether is fluid, as recently proposed in the December 2005 issue of Scientific American by Theodore Jacobson and Renaud Parentani.
Besides the Unified Force Theory, QADI has also developed the foundation for an atomic binding energy equation, an electron binding energy equation, a conductance constant, fine structure constants for the proton and neutron, and geometrical models for photons, subatomic particles, and quantum units of space-time. These are significant accomplishments, and should be receiving close attention from scientists and researchers. The theory is testable, coherent, mathematically derived, empirically based, and uses easy-to-understand Newtonian equations.
Along with providing more precise values for the Strong Nuclear Charge and Weak Nuclear Relationship, three other measurements where they predict a slightly different value than the Standard Model are in the Casimir equation, the neutron magnetic moment, and neutron g-factor. More accurate experiments should confirm which values are correct, which could verify the validity of the Aether Physics Model.
Source: Quantum AetherDynamics Institute
#3
Posted 05 June 2006 - 06:38 AM
#4
Posted 05 June 2006 - 07:07 AM
cwes99_03 said:
The white papre is published. There's a link in the 3rd paragraph of the article....
#5
Posted 05 June 2006 - 09:50 AM
There are two possible reasons why an explanatory essay should be unintelligible. 1--The subject is so profound and requires such a new and unique vocabulary, that it is essentially difficult by virtue of its novelty. 2--The subject is being hidden behind an obfuscade of profoundly incoherent rhetoric.
Consider the following extract:
"We can think of cardinal mass and charge as being associated with objective reality, while ordinal mass and charge is associated with environmental, orsubjective, reality. The environment is non-material, but the quantification of the environment is as essential for understanding existence as the quantification of the matter that abides in it."
It almost makes sense. Almost. But why doesn't it make sense? Is it because the subject is so arcane? No, apparently, the text itself is intended to be opaque to analysis.
This white paper is supposed to EXPLAIN, dammit! Does it? No, it doesn't! It just weaves an intricate Gordian Knot of obfuscation and tantalizing hints of what might (or might not) be insights into a new way of looking at physics. A white paper is not written to give hints, but to make clear. This white paper makes nothing clear.
-- - - - - -
What concerns me is not the way things are, but rather the way people think things are.
Epictetus, Greek Philosopher
The map is NOT the territory.
Korzybski, Polish-American Philosopher
#6
Posted 05 June 2006 - 09:55 AM
Bill
Enjoy Hypography? Become a Hypography sponsor!
#7
Posted 05 June 2006 - 11:44 AM
TheBigDog said:
Pyrotex said:
Pyrotex said:
I vow to get through the paper, proving that my capacity to endure torture is as least 4 times that of Pyrotex
#8
Posted 05 June 2006 - 05:46 PM
Quote
What do yo mean, keep up my work? I assume you have followed some of my posts here? and I take it you think it is related to the theory in this article..
that stuff aside, you bet, theres no reason I would stop when making such great progress.
#9
Posted 05 June 2006 - 08:28 PM
Please post something on our Facebook Fan Page or follow us on Twitter for updates.
Science is not only compatible with spirituality; it is a profound source of spirituality.
- Carl Sagan
#10
Posted 06 June 2006 - 04:43 AM
Tormod said:
Yeah, it's not showing up in many of the other news sources either. I'm anxious to see if any serious holes are poked in it by the physics community. So far I'm not seeing any thumbs up or down on it....
#11
Posted 06 June 2006 - 04:47 AM
The theory needs allot of work, but it's on the right track. They need help proving or disproving the theory and it's predictions. The science community should be happy to oblige.
This is the bones of the Theory I've been working on myself. They have allot of things way more defined than I do, but they are also missing crucial pieces, like the Neutrino. It's beautiful really, but it needs help. Shall we attempt to tare this one to peices, I bet it will hold up, mostly.
<timbl> (Tim-Berners Lee): No, David Weinberger, the [semantic] web is NOT a single categorization of everything agreed [upon] by everyone!
Formerly known as KickAssClown
Hyper Physics
Hyper Math
TVTropes
Wikipedia
#12
Posted 06 June 2006 - 05:30 AM
"in a scottish accent" said:
Cap'n! My crank-o-meter, she jus' wenna straight on pas' eleven and is a-headin' on up to twelve!
TFS
#13
Posted 06 June 2006 - 06:05 AM
TheFaithfulStone said:
Can I have a Talisker with that, please.
Please post something on our Facebook Fan Page or follow us on Twitter for updates.
Science is not only compatible with spirituality; it is a profound source of spirituality.
- Carl Sagan
#14
Posted 06 June 2006 - 06:58 AM
#15
Posted 06 June 2006 - 10:06 AM

Help
Join now



Promote to Article
















