Introducing Majik

[Majik]

Hi, my name is Mike. And I think I may have found the TOE. See what I've got so far at:

http://hook.sirus.com/users/mjake/QMfromlogic.htm

It's still a work in progress. But I think I know how to process.

I work as an electronics engineer and spend time on this TOE programme as time permits. I had some graduate level courses in math and physics about 20 years ago. And I a study a little math in my spare time as it seems relavant, such as differential forms, etc.

So I may have some technical math or physics question along the way here. Do you think I'm likely to find any math help in these forums?

I look forward so some constructive conversations. Thanks.

Mike.

[mkirkpatrick]

Welcome to the forum Mike,you seem to have it all covered?We are all looking for the TOE here so you are in the right place.

Hope you settle in quickly to the forum and begin posting away.




warmest regards michael.

[Majik]

Does ToeQuest forums have the ability to incorporate LaTex or other math symbol character display formats? Thanks.

[mkirkpatrick]

Does ToeQuest forums have the ability to incorporate LaTex or other math symbol character display formats? Thanks.

Yes it does,contact Antonio lao he is the expert here at that,send him an private message
and he will tell you all about it.


all the best michael.

[dleviwing]

Hi Majik;
Welcome to Toequest.

Though logic is a great tool for producing theories and mathematics is a great tool for understanding and interpreting data of physical reality, if you do not produce a means to test the conjectures with experiments, it is not science. Science is by definition a discipline of experimental methodology to produce emperical data and thus your attempt in your comment section to redefine science in favor of logical reasoning over experimental data is unacceptable. Your proposal would simply make science another religion; too much of that is going on now in the mainstream of science.

You may wish to provide an interpretation of your work in a simple communication language; something like English would do.

[RascalPuff]

Hello Majik:
Please consider a reference to
http://www.toequest.com/forum/toe-th...ies.html?ltr=T

and say what you think of it.

Best regards,
- RP

[Majik]

Hi Majik;
Welcome to Toequest.

Though logic is a great tool for producing theories and mathematics is a great tool for understanding and interpreting data of physical reality, if you do not produce a means to test the conjectures with experiments, it is not science. Science is by definition a discipline of experimental methodology to produce emperical data and thus your attempt in your comment section to redefine science in favor of logical reasoning over experimental data is unacceptable. Your proposal would simply make science another religion; too much of that is going on now in the mainstream of science.

You may wish to provide an interpretation of your work in a simple communication language; something like English would do.

Obviously I am aware of this delemma. So I'm not sure which forum my theory would be most welcome.

My work so far seems to show that the Feynman path integral can be derived from only logical concerns, without the need for experiment. Some reject this as "science" since confirmation of experiment is absent. But experiment has confirmed the path integral, and I have confirmed the path integral from only logic. So experiement has confirm my logic, right?

Also, I thought that sciense more fundamentally was about proving that all things have a reasonable basis. So isn't my thesis just a more formal statement of science? Afterall, what would we do if we found that one experiement contradicted another, or seemingly so? Would we say that reality is truly illogical? Or would we be more apt to question the results or procedures of the experiments? I'm quite confident that we would all assume something is wrong with the experiment. For our more fundamental belief is that reality is at least consistent with itself - that all things are ultimately logical. This is the premise that I start with to build my theory. I'm just following the basis of all science - that all facts are consistent. So how could this not be science?

So again I ask, what forum should I begin posting in? Thanks.

[analog]

Hello Majik,

Welcome to Toequest.

You can post your theory either as a thread, an article, or start your own blog about it. Your Toe Theory would be the place to start a thread about it, but if it's rather long or you would like to be able to edit all aspects of it with no time limit then a blog or article would probably be more to your liking. Here's the link to ToE Theory Articles. You can go to the blog link to start your own blog, but it will probably get more views as an article IMHO. You can still start a thread to discuss it in Your Toe Theory forum even if you write it as an article.

Let me know if I can help with anything else.

Regards,

Tim

[Majik]

Hello Majik,

Welcome to Toequest.

You can post your theory either as a thread, an article, or start your own blog about it. Your Toe Theory would be the place to start a thread about it, but if it's rather long or you would like to be able to edit all aspects of it with no time limit then a blog or article would probably be more to your liking. Here's the link to ToE Theory Articles. You can go to the blog link to start your own blog, but it will probably get more views as an article IMHO. You can still start a thread to discuss it in Your Toe Theory forum even if you write it as an article.

Let me know if I can help with anything else.

Regards,

Tim

Thanks for the information. So I'm thinking about creating an article. But I see some sort of "credentials" are required. This is where I hit a brick wall. What kind of credentials are required. Do I need to claim a degree in physics? Or do I need to claim affiliation with a university? I have neither. I am unaffiliated, I'm conducting independent research, and I would rather work anonymously for now. This puts me at a disadvantage.

I tried to present my theory at PhysicsForum.com, but was immediate rejected because my ideas have never appeared on the arXiv, and not likely to because of the unaffiliated, anonymous, independent nature of my work. I did post on sci.physics.foundations, a relatively new Usenet newgroup. I got some interesting comments that allowed me to clarify certain things. But I didn't get the appreciation that I feel my work deserves. I'm hoping for a better response here at ToeQuest. Do you think I would still qualify as an author of an article? Thanks.

[RascalPuff]

Hi Majik:

Your work may be posted in 'Forums', under the category of 'Member Articles'.
That's where mine is...
http://www.toequest.com/forum/toe-th...ies.html?ltr=T

Best regards,
- RP