permission to come aboard?

[Mikal]

Thanks Jack....if you keep using these examples, I think that I can follow you and actually learn something scientific...smiles...

I also find it intriguing...that you feel gravity has a connect to time...I strongly feel that but do not really know how to explain that adequetely...

I'll continue to read in your link and see what else interests me...


Mikal

[austintorn@aol.com]

Jack, the ‘Dynamic Matter’ pdf on your site was one of the greatest and convincing expositions that I’ve ever read, resolving several “unresolvable” areas of physics. You must have been delighted when all the math worked out.

There is your simple but ingenious insight of having real particles accumulating from Hawking Radiation even amounting to stars. And the truth of why the curvature of space is not so, plus what is the replacement for the effects of what we thought was from dark matter, how time is of a more consistent movement than the vague ‘motion’ commonly thought of, wave functions all the way up, and even why dinosaurs didn’t collapse from their own mass. You solved a vast amount of dilemmas, Jack.

I’ll leave the details for inquisitive readers to find in the pdf.


(There is a recent Scientific American blurb telling why the black holes at the center of galaxies formed first, before the galaxies):

http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/39750/

[jackaxama]

Thank you Austin for your kind words.

I appreciate the fact that you read the entire treatise. As you discovered, once I pieced certain relationships together, others fell into place. And as you noted, the math really ties it altogether. I was under pressure for a long time, from a few friends, to publish what I had. However, I felt it was not complete until I tied the Pioneer 10 & 11 anomaly into the other momentum anomalies. And yes...the day that equation came together was very satisfying.

Thank you again,
Jack

[Wick]

Thanks, Jack, for joining us. I've started reading your pdf and will bring my questions here unless you open a thread for your theory.

I have found that when people work hard on something like this, they find answers to certain questions, but discover a number of new questions that remain unanswered. Are you willing to share what new mysteries presented themselves during your research?

My theory on gravity is perhaps the screwiest one on TOEQuest. That's alright though, because I'm a writer and not to be taken seriously. Seriously!

One of Einstein's assumptions in relativity (both GR and SR) is that light moves at the velocity c in relation to all frames of reference. Observation confirms this to be true, but I think such observations can be interpreted in one of two ways. We have defaulted in the light-moves-at-the-velocity-c direction...but couldn't it also be possible that light is at rest and all other frames of reference are moving through the light at the velocity "c".

See! Screwy!

Now you may say that if all frames of reference were moving at c through resting light, then light would only be moving in one direction, and that would be true if light were a 3D phenomenon. But I suspect it is not. Light is a 4D phenomenon (as Kaluza suggested many decades ago). As such it can pass through all frames of reference in any direction even if all frames of reference are only moving in one direction.

What does this have to do with gravity?

Well, I also suspect that fundamental matter is 4D in nature and it is snagged upon the moving 3-space (4D fundmental particles intersecting 3-space). As the fundamental matter is pulled through the resting background of light, it exerts a pull upon the fabric of space, causing 3-space to stretch along a 4th spatial dimension. The reason why fundamental matter has mass is also related to this pull upon the fabric of space. Because each particle is being pulled through 4-space at the velocity c, it is disinclined to alter its course. It "wants" to keep moving along that course in accordance with Newton's laws of motion.

The implication is that no frame of reference in the observable universe is at rest. All creation (except for light) is moving along a SPATIAL axis which has heretofore gone undetected. I call this axis the Tempth axis and its directions are ord (the direction from which the universe is moving) and entrop (the direction toward which the universe is moving).

Apologies for the long tirade. Looking forward to reading your book.

Regards!

Wick

[jackaxama]

Hi Wick:

Thank you for your interest in my work. I will be glad to address your questions or insights as you get further into the pdf file I posted.

As for your ideas on the speed of light....interestingly...they are very close to what I outliined in Section 18 of my book. I cannot cover them completely in this post, primarily because there is a fair amount of deduction in the previous chapters leading up to my postulate about the speed of light. However, if you do get that far in my book, you will see that mathematically, the size and mass of the entire Universe appear to be just the right amounts to create a universal scalar field that is equal to the speed of light. A scalar field can be an abstract concept and difficult for most to relate to. And in this case, the scalar field represents velocity (the speed of light) with no direction. A massless particle, such as a photon, has no other choice but to move away at the speed of light, because of this universal scalar field.

Thanks again for your interest,
Jack

[austintorn@aol.com]

Hey, Jack, happy to see that you are so free with giving away your pdf book of information—that’s a good way to make progress.

Henry Cavendish, on the other hand, was a century ahead of his time (on electrical conductivity) but kept everything so secret that some of it didn’t come out until the century had passed.

Without telling any one, Cavendish discovered anticipated the law of conservation of energy, Ohm’s law, Dalton’s Law of Partial Pressures, Ricther’s Law of Reciprocal Proportions, Charles’s Law of Gases, and the principles of electrical conductivity. And that’s just some of it. There was also tidal friction, atmospheric cooling, freezing mixtures, heterogeneous equilibria, clues to the noble gases, and of course the gravitational constant, and the weight of the Earth from a nautilus looking machine of weight, counterweights, pendulums, shafts, and torsion wires.

He was so shy that it was known that on no account was he to be approached or even looked at. Those who sought his views were advised to wander into his vicinity as if by accident and to “talk as it were into vacancy”. If their remarks were not worthy, an actual vacancy would quickly appear.

I put some of these kind of stories in a “poetic” form in this thread, as it is fun to observe the lengths that scientists went to in the “olden” days:

Science Stories

http://www.toequest.com/forum/genera...e-stories.html

Will reread your treatise…

[jackaxama]

Austin:
Interesting stuff. I didn't know that other stuff about Cavendish. He sounds nearly as pecular as Newton. And then Einstien didn't like to wear socks.

I have made my research availble for free, because, as you noted, it is more improtant to me that my work be desiminated among those that are interested then to hold out for a few dollars on each book. Your reading of it and your positive review is a better reward to me than the money. And also, your words will possibly contribute to more sales.

In a similar way to Cavendish and others, the Wright Brothers were so protective of their invention of the airplane, that aviation passed them by as they tried to sue those who they felt were infringing. As Curtiss would tell them, there was plenty of market for the airplane for everyone, especially if they worked together.

Wick suggested that I open a thread on another forum. I am looking at TOE Theories. My work isn't the TOE, however, I think it is fair to say that in contributes in that direction. So perhaps that is the appropriate forum? Jack

[Wick]

Jack,

May I recommend posting to Your TOE Theory. I know that you don't consider your work a TOE, but there are many threads there that only move part way toward a TOE. The rules are not hard and fast. I have some questions I want to ask you about your book. If you are planning to open a new topic, I'll wait and post the questions there.

Regards!

Wick

[dolly]

Hello Jack. First, are you fond of sailing, (permission to come aboard) is a respected term used by those who love and appreciate time spent with the ocean. I am such a person. Second, as Mikal has expressed, I too would like to extend thanks for your patience and willingness to convey your thoughts in laymen terms. Do to a lack of formal education some terms/language are above me. Have found most if not all members at TOE are understanding and make the effort to explain their thoughts and theories in a manner we all can grasp. Though I offer little and in some cases no feed back, I am looking forward to your future posts and thoughts. Oh ya welcome to and enjoy your time here at TOE. PEACE dolly

[austintorn@aol.com]

Hi Jack,

Either TOE Theory (since you are publishing it as a book) or Your TOE Theory (for work in progress or for some of us amateurs), take your pick… doesn't mater if one falls in between.

Dolly & Mikal, luckily Jack's book is in very understandable language and leads one on gradually. One could probably even learn some good basics from it, too, perhaps needing to just looking up but a few terms along the way.

Maybe Jack was coming aboard the spacecraft of ToeQuest, asking permission because it is a top-secret place like none other. We need to get it better known on the internet and attract some more real life scientists.