Fact Check, debunking obviously false information

Quote from RobertBryant

We may have to wait awhile to see whether Mills-time or Jurg-no time re useful.

A while ago I talked to someone nameless, who said Mills is one of the smartest people alive. He is a well respected physicist who built some of the first lasers and CD-Roms.

He said despite Mills, and not of his fault, that there is something deeper that needs to be resolved. He said time. He pointed me at Tepper Gill's work. He said it could take many many years for this to all unravel.

I'm attaching the most recent paper, interestingly called "Alternate World View II"

Some people are well aware that their time is running down. As already mentioned the breakthrough award (3m$) was granted to complete nonsensical work about super gravity despite somebody related to the jury did know that it (gravitation) can be exactly (no using a single fudge factor..) derived from SO(4) basic form factors.

Just FYI: gravitation and mass are two different things. And I'll be interested in how SO(4) alters space-time geometry, creates black holes, etc? In fact I'll be very interested to see many things substantiating the exciting claims made above on this thread: my requests have as yet not been answered. I'll review what, from the outside, things look like when I next have time.

THH

Quote from THHuxleynew

...In fact I'll be very interested to see many things substantiating the exciting claims made above on this thread: my requests have as yet not been answered. I'll review what, from the outside, things look like when I next have time.

Here's some light reading for you, Huxley:

The nature of time

The speed of light is not constant

How gravity works

The principle of equivalence and other myths

Black holes

I wrote the above. It's all fairly straightforward. I'd say Einstein missed the trick that a black hole forms from the inside out, like a hailstone. Imagine you’re a water molecule. You alight upon the surface of the hailstone. You can’t pass through this surface. But you are presently surrounded by other water molecules, and eventually buried by them. So whilst you can’t pass through the surface, the surface can pass through you.

If you'll have a theory that replaces the standard model then you'll can explain things that the standard model cannot. Give this a try.

Why and how does the neutrino have mass?

Why does the neutrino oscillate over its three favors?

Quote from THHuxleynew

Just FYI: gravitation and mass are two different things

THH revelation: gravitation and mass are two different things?

Quote from Alan Smith

OUNDATIONS FOR PROPER-TIME RELATIVISTIC

QUANTUM THEORY

T. L. GILL, T. MORRIS, AND S. K. KURTZ

A very good classic try that includes the magnetic interaction and already debunks some QED claims by doing a more deep mathematical reasoning.

GILL, MORRIS, AND KURTZ

This confirms our claim that the new dissipative term is equivalent to an effective mass that arises due to the collaborative acceleration of the particle. This means that the cause for radiation reaction comes directly from the use of the local clock to formulate Maxwell’s equations. It follows that, in this approach there is no need to assume advanced potentials, self-interaction, mass renormalization and the Lorentz-Dirac equation in order to account for it (radiation reaction), as is required when the observer clock is used.

Of course it can only minimally improve QED as they still use the classic space and not SO(4). The calculated value for the n=2 state in hydrogen is marginally better that with QED but from a physical point of view both are a fail. SO(4) physics delivers more that double the digits with a closed classical formula based on SO(4) relativistic magnetic interaction. This is light years ahead...

Quote from THHuxleynew

Just FYI: gravitation and mass are two different things. And I'll be interested in how SO(4) alters space-time geometry, creates black holes, etc? In fact I'll be very interested to see many things substantiating the exciting claims made above on this thread: my requests have as yet not been answered. I'll review what, from the outside, things look like when I next have time.

Now we are back to college again... THH will have to learn that SO(4) pure mechanical inertia will shine up as classical mass. This can neither be explained by GER nor by any other model. Thus mass is way more complex as it is currently treated by kindergarten physics. All mass is based on EM mass and added mechanical (inertia) mass. The gravitation force is also based on the EM forces and thus mass is fully contained in EM theory + mechanics .

If you look at the generated pictures of the black hole you see exactly the wave structure we expect from a Clifford torus surface.

Quote from JohnDuffield

Here's some light reading for you, Huxley:

The nature of time

The speed of light is not constant

How gravity works

The principle of equivalence and other myths

Black holes

I wrote the above. It's all fairly straightforward. I'd say Einstein missed the trick that a black hole forms from the inside out, like a hailstone. Imagine you’re a water molecule. You alight upon the surface of the hailstone. You can’t pass through this surface. But you are presently surrounded by other water molecules, and eventually buried by them. So whilst you can’t pass through the surface, the surface can pass through you.

Display More

Clicked on your blackholes section and noted your proposition about gamma ray burst....

RM says this

In a special case wherein the gravitational potential energy density of a blackhole equales that of the Planck mass, matter converts to energy and spacetime expands with the release of a gamma ray burst. The singularity in the SM is eliminated. The basis of the antigravitational force is presented with supporting experimental evidence.

Brett's summary

Mills's gravitational theory predicts that any extreme release of energy in the universe must also release a gravitational pulse corresponding to the event, due to the rapid spacetime expansion that occurs. Recently, the first gravitational wave ever detected was found to be associated with a gamma-ray burst (GRB), which is an extremely energetic event.

Astronomers have no explanation for what the GRB could be if it was also the source of the gravitational wave. According to Mills' theory, the matter in the center of a very heavy black hole can reach a critical density that allows the annihilation of matter directly into energy (photons). The resulting photons are extremely energetic cosmic rays. Thus, black holes can annihilate directly into energy with the emission of a GRB and the release of a gravitational pulse. These photons are interesting because they are also proto-particles in which both the particle and antiparticle has a mass called the Planck Mass, but they are unable to separate because the escape velocity required would be the speed of light. [interestingly, these gamma rays will impinge on dark matter (hydrino) and result in pair production and thus the diffuse 511 keV radiation -- the circle of life :)]

Background (copied and pasted)

A) In Mills's theory, the event of particle production can be described as a transformation from a spherical shell of electric and magnetic fields (the photon) into a spherical shell of charge of identical radius (the particle-antiparticle pair).

B) This can only occur if the energy of the photon is a close match for the energy of a physically-allowed particle at that radius. By this I mean the stored (classical) electric and magnetic energy of the particle at that radius must equal the particle's eventual mass. Note that this radius is very small, but this is not the permanent size for the particle. The particle is free to change size and shape, often deforming under different conditions later in its life.

C) The particle-antiparticle pair must reach an escape velocity to split into respective particles; and this process actually 'warps' spacetime, producing a special-relativistic contraction of spacetime itself that is radial, and spherically symmetric, producing a gravitational field. The gravitational mass of the particle is directly calculated from the Newtonian escape velocity of the particle from its antiparticle.

Quote from axil

If you'll have a theory that replaces the standard model then you'll can explain things that the standard model cannot. Give this a try.

Why and how does the neutrino have mass?

Why does the neutrino oscillate over its three favors?

It isn't my theory. Like I said, I didn't write all those papers in post 314.

The neutrino doesn't have mass. It travels at c, like a photon. In this respect the Standard Model is right. The claim that neutrino oscillation means the neutrino has mass is a non-sequitur.

Why does the neutrino oscillate? Because it's a rotational wave which is something like a "travelling breather". See the Wikipedia article on breathers:

Quote from Wyttenbach

... I recently tried to get access to a QM/QED conference. First task:You need a login to a group to be able to submit. Guess what happened?

I don't know. What happened?.

Quote from Navid

RM says this

In a special case wherein the gravitational potential energy density of a blackhole equales that of the Planck mass, matter converts to energy and spacetime expands with the release of a gamma ray burst. The singularity in the SM is eliminated. The basis of the antigravitational force is presented with supporting experimental evidence.

This is one other important contribution of Mills work. He first understood that the release of mass (photon) from a dense 4D rotating EM flux leads to an expansion of the dense rotating flux, that in fact is equivalent to the expansion of the 4D homogenous (3D,t) space. Thus if rigid mass converts to photon like mass the space itself expands what is the true cause of the expansion of the universe. This allowed him to predict that the universe in fact expands (before this could be measured!!). (The origin of this expansion is given by SO(4) physics that shows that the coupling charge² is proportional to mass*radius. )

The other problem is that general relativity only predicts a singularity as found by famous Schwarzschild that died in/off war. A black hole is not predicted by GER as it is not able to describe anything behind the so called Schwarzschild radius. GER, as all other field theories sole based on Algebra, it is only able to describe a gravitational field in an empty space.

Thus be aware that a black hole does not fulfill the equation of GER as it is able to release energy - a problem Hawkins tried to fix, but only for soft radiation. A black hole ignores Einsteins GER as it does not curve space according the GER prediction. GER only holds close down to the black hole surface.

A black hole emits a massive mass-like jet of particles along its poles something that is expected from mechanics that simply tells if a mass falls down e.g. in black hole only halve of its total energy can go into a rotation, the rest works translative in direction of the field. This effect is in principe "easy" to explain with a 4D-torus topology where the objects falling down from one/other side get kicked out 90^o up/down depending on the orientation of the magnetic force relative to the movement.

Conclusion: Black holes fully invalidate GER as the space curvature is not a singularity inside a black hole.

Quote from Bruce__H

I don't know. What happened?.

They refused - with no given reason - the account -needed to submit a paper! Worse than Catholic church...

Quote from Navid

Clicked on your blackholes section and noted your proposition about gamma ray burst....

I read Einstein's 1939 paper along with Oppenheimer and Snyder’s 1939 frozen star paper on continued gravitational contraction, and thought something's missing here, because falling bodies don't slow down. But I don't think you can call it my proposition. See my Firewall! article and read Friedwardt Winterberg's 2001 paper gamma ray bursters and Lorentzian relativity. He said this: “if the balance of forces holding together elementary particles is destroyed near the event horizon, all matter would be converted into zero rest mass particles which could explain the large energy release of gamma ray bursters”. I think he's essentially correct. Winterberg was the guy who had the idea for GPS. He's ninety. I think he deserves a Nobel prize actually.

Quote from Wyttenbach

They refused - with no given reason - the account -needed to submit a paper! Worse than Catholic church...

In many conferences you need to be a member of some society first. Maybe it is that.

But I recall Alan Smith saying that a number of prominent people have toured the Exalox lab and some have been impressed. Get one of them to tell one of these organizations that you are a serious person (possibly wrong, but serious) and to allow you to make your case. These organizations (at least the ones I know of) are trying to exclude kooks and lightweight amateurs, they aren't trying to silence serious challenges to the status quo. They like serious, well argued, challenges to the status quo.

Quote from Bruce__H

But I recall Alan Smith saying that a number of prominent people have toured the Exalox lab and some have been impressed.

Don't be worried: There will be only a few people on this planet that can dig in the model as it requires that you forget or at least question what you (believe to) know.

The best way to force them is to frustrate them. To explain people why e.g. the quark model is as valid as a Yoghurt model and can be eaten as an appetizer with low calorie content... Current physic fails and will fail for ever to deliver a dense matter model that works because it uses incomplete math (what is easy to prove) . They can waste their lives 10 more years. In the mean time we develop many interesting technologies based on the new model...

If this another successful prediction of the standard model come true?

https://phys.org/news/2019-10-…-solid-state-crystal.html

Axion particle spotted in solid-state crystal

Quote

"An axion insulator is a correlated topological phase, predicted to arise from the formation of a charge-density wave in a Weyl semimetal. The accompanying sliding mode in the charge-density-wave phase, the phason, is an axion. It is expected to cause anomalous magneto-electric transport effects. However, this axionic charge density wave has so far eluded experimental detection. In this paper, we report the observation of a large, positive contribution to the magneto-conductance in the sliding mode of the charge-density wave Weyl semimetal (TaSe4)2I for collinear electric and magnetic fields (E||B). The positive contribution to the magneto-conductance originates from the anomalous axionic contribution of the chiral anomaly to the phason current, and is locked to the parallel alignment of E and B. By rotating B, we show that the angular dependence of the magneto-conductance is consistent with the anomalous transport of an axionic charge-density wave."

Is this the real thing, another particle to be included in the particle zoo of the standard model or just another quasiparticle?

Quote from axil

If this another successful prediction of the standard model come true?

https://phys.org/news/2019-10-…-solid-state-crystal.html

Axion particle spotted in solid-state crystal

Is this the real thing, another particle to be included in the particle zoo of the standard model or just another quasiparticle?

Display More

All these things are quasiparticles. Phenomena in specific systems that mimic the behaviour of (quantum) particles. Nothing to do with SM except superlative demonstration of the power of QM to explain and predict diverse systems.

The Nobel Prize in Physics has been jointly awarded to James Peebles, Michel Mayor and Didier Queloz for their work in furthering our understanding of the universe.

In a ceremony in Stockholm on Tuesday, one half of the prize was awarded to Peebles for "theoretical discoveries in physical cosmology," and the other half to Mayor and Queloz for "the discovery of an exoplanet orbiting a solar-type star."

"This year's Nobel Prize in Physics rewards new understanding of the universe's structure and history, and the first discovery of a planet orbiting a solar-type star outside our solar system," tweeted the Nobel committee.

"The discoveries have forever changed our conceptions of the world."

Quote from axil

"The discoveries have forever changed our conceptions of the world."

I'm happy that they rewarded some "real" physicists! More than enough prizes did go to rubbish math/physics like Higgs and CERN fake particle detections.