[trinitree88]

A successful theory of everything should be able to make predictions of physical effects. This one does.
In the late seventies and early eighties I developed an interest in particle physics, astrophysics, and supernovae. Out of that interest I saw that there was match between the characteristics of a graviton, the theorized carrier of the gravitational interaction and the neutral current Z boson as a neutrino/antineutrino pair. So, I wrote up a paper and submitted it to The Gravity Research Foundation in Wellesley, Mass. for their annual competition. My attorney copyrighted it in the event it was promising.
It predicts that a change in the ambient neutrino flux gradient will be accompanied by a transient and corresponding change in the local gravitational field gradient. When supernova 1987a went off and the prompt neutrino burst was detected at the Mont Blanc, IMB, Kamiokande, Baksan neutrino detectors, and simultaneously at the Rome and Maryland bar gravitational wave detectors, that prediction was fulfilled. This has been published about 25 times since then in various journals including the Astrophysical Journal, Il Nuovo Cimento C, etc. Larry Sulak, principlal investigator of the IMB, whom I personally know from the MIT Winter Course on Nuclear and Particle Physics,91-92, claims the chance of those coincidences being wrong is statistically 1/10,000. You can view the details at www.bautforum where I post as Trinitree88.
There is no dark matter here, no dark energy, no violation of conservation laws, no new particle, not even a change in the Standard Model. The Z couples universally to all the particles in the Satandard Model, and the neutrino/antineutrino pair was suggested by Nobel Laureate George Gamow in the 60's as a candidate for a graviton. I simply put the pieces together and looked for, and predicted the subsequent effect. Sincerely, Pete.

[bottomlander]

Originally Posted by trinitree88 Out of that interest I saw that there was match between the characteristics of a graviton, the theorized carrier of the gravitational interaction and the neutral current Z boson as a neutrino/antineutrino pair. The Z couples universally to all the particles in the Satandard Model, and the neutrino/antineutrino pair was suggested by Nobel Laureate George Gamow in the 60's as a candidate for a graviton. Sincerely, Pete.

Dear trinitree88,

According to your message as quoted above, neutrino/antineutrino pair seems actually a Z boson which may form a neutral current.

It will be a great help to science community if you give us some information of the Z boson as within the standard model.
Do you have any model upon how the relativistic mass of Z boson (once turns into a neutral current) will match that of the range of neutrino/antineutrino pair?

Best Regards. Bottomlander

[trinitree88]

Originally Posted by bottomlander Dear trinitree88, According to your message as quoted above, neutrino/antineutrino pair seems actually a Z boson which may form a neutral current. It will be a great help to science community if you give us some information of the Z boson as within the standard model. Do you have any model upon how the relativistic mass of Z boson (once turns into a neutral current) will match that of the range of neutrino/antineutrino pair? Best Regards. Bottomlander

Bottomlander. Below an energy ~ 1.022Mev, the Z[sup]0[/sup] can only be one of two entities photon/antiphoton (it is it's own antiparticle) or neutrino/antineutrino. It's the latter that behaves as a graviton. It's possible to have higher energy neutrino/antineutrino pairs, but it is incumbent that low ones exist. When you look at the SU(5) symmetry by Howard Georgi, Sci. Amer. April 1981...the Z fits on the diagonal of the interactions of the quarks and leptons, coupling to them all. Pete.

[bottomlander]

Originally Posted by trinitree88 Bottomlander. Below an energy ~ 1.022Mev, the Z[sup]0[/sup] can only be one of two entities photon/antiphoton (it is it's own antiparticle) or neutrino/antineutrino. It's the latter that behaves as a graviton. It's possible to have higher energy neutrino/antineutrino pairs, but it is incumbent that low ones exist. When you look at the SU(5) symmetry by Howard Georgi, Sci. Amer. April 1981...the Z fits on the diagonal of the interactions of the quarks and leptons, coupling to them all. Pete.

Gald to have your information. I hope physicists will look for more details upon neutrinos.

I feel that neutrinos constitute an interesting category in the family of elementary particles due to their spontaneous high speeds comparable to that of photons.

Neutrinos should have different intrinsic structures when compared with other fermions. Similarly, photons which surely have different intrinsic structures when compared with other bosons may be singled out also.

Best Regards. Bottomlander

[trinitree88]

Originally Posted by bottomlander Gald to have your information. I hope physicists will look for more details upon neutrinos. I feel that neutrinos constitute an interesting category in the family of elementary particles due to their spontaneous high speeds comparable to that of photons. Neutrinos should have different intrinsic structures when compared with other fermions. Similarly, photons which surely have different intrinsic structures when compared with other bosons may be singled out also. Best Regards. Bottomlander

bottomlander;29187. You're welcome. I do believe however that neutrinos travel identically at c, like photons. SN1987a in the Large Magellanic Cloud, is ~ 170,000 light years away. The coincidences seen had traveled for ~5,361,120,000,000 seconds..(I rounded the years to 365 days.) The delay time was ~ 2 seconds, and that's really a human error, as the IMB was set by a technician's second hand on his watch. Kamiokande was on Universal Time. Even so, if you divide the two times....they are 0.9999999999992/1.0. So I'd say to eleven sig figs they're equal, and neutrinos are massless too. Remember that experiments searching for neutrino oscillations all involve matter path lengths that are miles in length, and MSW matter oscillations only delimit the upper bounds on possible neutrino masses. The zero mass Fermionic neutrino lives yet. It also saves the Laws of Electron, Muon, and Tau Family Number....something never seen violated in a particle physics lab. Not one experiment, not one run, not one event in trillions. Nada. Nicht. Nein. Das ist Gut. Pete.

[RussT]

Originally Posted by trinitree88 A successful theory of everything should be able to make predictions of physical effects. This one does. In the late seventies and early eighties I developed an interest in particle physics, astrophysics, and supernovae. Out of that interest I saw that there was match between the characteristics of a graviton, the theorized carrier of the gravitational interaction and the neutral current Z boson as a neutrino/antineutrino pair. So, I wrote up a paper and submitted it to The Gravity Research Foundation in Wellesley, Mass. for their annual competition. My attorney copyrighted it in the event it was promising. It predicts that a change in the ambient neutrino flux gradient will be accompanied by a transient and corresponding change in the local gravitational field gradient. When supernova 1987a went off and the prompt neutrino burst was detected at the Mont Blanc, IMB, Kamiokande, Baksan neutrino detectors, and simultaneously at the Rome and Maryland bar gravitational wave detectors, that prediction was fulfilled. This has been published about 25 times since then in various journals including the Astrophysical Journal, Il Nuovo Cimento C, etc. Larry Sulak, principlal investigator of the IMB, whom I personally know from the MIT Winter Course on Nuclear and Particle Physics,91-92, claims the chance of those coincidences being wrong is statistically 1/10,000. You can view the details at www.bautforum where I post as Trinitree88. There is no dark matter here, no dark energy, no violation of conservation laws, no new particle, not even a change in the Standard Model. The Z couples universally to all the particles in the Satandard Model, and the neutrino/antineutrino pair was suggested by Nobel Laureate George Gamow in the 60's as a candidate for a graviton. I simply put the pieces together and looked for, and predicted the subsequent effect. Sincerely, Pete.

I am very glad I found this site, and equally as happy that I found this from trinitree88

Hopefully much of the Hubrus that is found on 'some' other sites can be left at the door here, and evidence that is supplied for different concepts can be evaluated with some common sense included rather than just trivializations, dismissals, and demands for maths that just assume that because they have applied maths to theirs, that either 1. you can't possibly understand anything if you can't provide or do the maths, or 2. that their maths MUST be applied to the right correlations in the first place, because you are not providing the maths to counter their correlations.

That is a double straw man arguement with a sharp dimissal/trivialization that sends POSSIBLE valid arguments to the 'don't even consider this BIN'. No issues here, right?

Any way, Trinitree88, I asked a question on baut...
Do you think it is 'possible' that the Neutrino Sea is responsible for the Shapiro Effect?

And you replied...RussT. As the changes in the neutrino sea flux mirror the geodetics of GR, I'm going to say yes.

SO, Tell me what you think of the way I have found to 'see' this as a dimesionless background Aether/Medium that the MMX was NOT looking for.

The grey indented 'plane' is not to scale for the light coming from the star, that is curved by the planets gravity.

http://www.bautforum.com/showpost.ph...1&postcount=19


BUT, in that link I gave you which shows the curved light from the star 'curving in space due to the planets curving of space', here is how to visualize that.

First, move the star to all the clock positions I suggested, AND visualize all of the 'darkness'/neutrinos IN THE WHOLE PICTURE coming straight at you and right through the planet, THEN 'see' the 'curved' light as the space is curved by the planet, and then realize that it can only be curved that slight because it (space/Neutrinos) is/are going so fast!!!

AND, now that you have seen that that grey indentation/plane can be moved so it matches that curved light whether the star is at 10 oclock, 7 oclock ETC, NOW move "YOUR" position so that you are 90 degrees to either side of that Planet, OR on the opposite side of the Planet, AND you will see the same curvature/plane no matter where you position is OR where the background stars position is.

That is a "DIMESSIONLESS" Background Gravity Field, all in straight line motion right at you from any direction ACCEPT for the small curvature of 'space' where the gravity of that body is slightly curving it due to the 'clumped' mass/at rest gravity that is curving that space in the presence of Baryonic Matter!

That's IT