[dleviwing]

KAC;
Having read some of your posts on the other forum I can only say they do not support your claims of science comprehension. If you were in deed the child prodigy you claim, you have wasted your abilities and that is sad.

I find it insulting that you would feel the members of TOEquest are gullible and ignorant enough to believe your self-proclaimed genius status – I’m afraid the self-proclaimed messiah has already been here before you.

[KAC]

Child Prodigy? No. I did not say that anywhere at any time. I am a human being and am subject to falsehood. I am wabi-sabi. Imperfect and incomplete.

As I have said elsewhere. I am but a fool in the circus. Do not listen to me for wisdom, but for foolishness. I do not seek wisdom, nor do I seek knowledge, I seek Truth, pure and intangible.

I merely am presenting my education, as they are my only real credentials as of to date. I can not boast this or that thing. I have taught myself for the most part, and can't claim having gone to a presdigious school, having a great mentor (other than perhaps my mother, but that is debatable.). However it remains the same, I have studied for nearly 14 years, now. Does this not count for anything? Or is my age a simple deciding factor? If that is the case, as seems to be the case, I will gladly pack up and leave.

I am rather intolerant of intolerance. I am also rather intolerant of authority figures for reasons above and beyond rational context. I have read much and seen much and have taken great ammounts of time to contemplate the nature of given methods, and models.

I admit that my model is incomplete, I brought it here, and before the Hypography crowd, because I desire assistance in developing it.

to simply toss it aside, is not constructive, and serves no purpose.

Anyway, dleviwing, I am not trying to convice you of anything, I am merely presenting the understanding I have developed, and some slight alterations to make compatiable GR, SR and QT.

Disclaimer: This is not a Theory of Everything, as such a creature is perposterious, at it's worst, and dubious at best. I merely intend to work out a kink in standard theory. That kink has been identified by careful analysis to be that of the mass-energy-charge fallacy. To a lesser degree I have also begun identification of other Major, though subtle fallacies in physics. Such as that of Independent Origin versus Dependent Origin. The Non-existance fallacy of Known Qualities/Quantities.

[mkirkpatrick]

KAC, would an absolute charge, radically alter the outcome of the dynamics and monopolar theory? What is the charge actually relative too?

kindregards michael.

[dleviwing]

KAC;
General Relativity (GR) is a mathematical geometry based on an observers perception of distance as viewed with light. This defines observations of relative motion but because light has “Relative Mass” it is influenced by massive objects and thus Special Relativity takes into account the influence of physical celestial objects of mass on the light we do our observation with. Quantum physics deals with the very small and does not have this problem with motion and distance. It is functional to the level of uncertainty which defines our ability to perform the measurement.

Theories are not science, they are only opinions of scientist that are nothing more than their best guess of a phenomena. Science comes in the form of creating experiments and measurements that can either validate the opinion or discredit it.

There have been countless experiments designed to detect monopoles. None have succeeded. Present a paradigm of monopoles and an experimental method to detect them and you will be a hero in the scientific world regardless of your educational level.

Dedicate yourself to understanding the fundamental methodology of science and you will not be distracted by the glitter and hype that is applied for show. Real science usually does not sell books or entice students to spend their money any more than real religion does. Those who continue to believe in the glitter, will never know truth.

[KAC]

By definition, at current we can not observe Monopoles. We aren't at that level. Understand that in my model, Monopoles are what constitute what we know as Mass and Energy. That light is quantized in units of Magnetic Charge, such that it is also the Quanta of Electric Charge.

Monopoles are true Quantum particles. When you observe them they will have properties other than what you expect. This is because to obsever (measure) them, you must convert them to mass or energy. Measure their poles, you must make them dipole, as that is the only thing we know how to work with in the current laws of physics.

A monopole will only appear to be a monopole by it's self, and as of current we have a paradox. How then do you observe an isolated Monopolar particle?

Further, how do you isolate a monopole? Put in a box? The box is by definition made up of an inequity of monopoles, This means that the monopole, can simply exit the box. Or will be absorbed by the box.

Unified field theory, by definition, must reconcile Relativity to Quantum Theory.

KAC, would an absolute charge, radically alter the outcome of the dynamics and monopolar theory?

Indeed, I do believe that Absolute Charge would not only alter the mechanics of Charge, but of the fundamental assumptions underlying matter. I don't have the math yet, I am working post haste on it, but I know that my model can describe particles using orbitial mechanics.

I can describe a photon interms of Frequency, Mass, or n bodies of Quantum Magnetic Charge. I can describe Mass in terms of n Bodies of Quantum Magnetic Charge. I can even show you which two particles I believe to be the best candiates to dub truely fundamental. However, I as of yet can not tell you how to isolate, and measure a monopole, in such a way that it retains it's properties.

What is the charge actually relative too?

Well, each other of course. Magnetic charge is dualistic. North and South. Each is equal(magnitude, Properties), but opposite(Direction, Spacial Orientation, not of the same space-time). Such that my model should, when complete account for all Classical laws, and all Quantum Priniciples. Or most of them at least. I am working towards 100% compliance.

[mkirkpatrick]

KAC,many thanks for your prompt and detailed answer to my question,keep up the studies young man.

kindest regards michael.

[KAC]

I would like to make a short statement regarding my force diagram.

What my diagram shows, is without the maths, so far, the interaction of mirrored forces to create the appearance of distinct groupings, four of them infact.

Alright, so lets start with E. E is the combonation of B+ and B-, interacting with other groups of E. I maybe making changes to the diagram, as I think perhaps I have my strong and weak mixed up.

However the concept remains. That E = |+B/-B| for Positively charged particles, E = |-B/+B| for Negatively Charged particles.

When E = +-1, then you know you have a Photon, or simply Pure energy. When you have E +2 or higher, or E -2 or higher. Then you have mass.

Strong is of the Mass type. Weak is of the Exlusive type (Free or loosely bound Monopoles.) and Gravity is the remained of field outside of these forces.

Note of interest: Does the Sun Orbit the earth, or does the Earth orbit the Sun?

Hint: If you drop two masses of different magnitude towards a significantly larger body, neglecting air friction. Which one hits first, the lighter or heavy body?