[Qspacer]

I suppose that all the members of this site realy seek for a total understanding of the elements of our universe. I claim that I can offer something close to that in a new theory called "Q-space theory" that I have begun to publish on october 2007.
The theory begins by dealing with the unification of physics from a totally new direction. Our allegedly inability to intuitively understand the conclusions of modern physics is reexamined. The "intuition problems" of modern physics are analyzed and practical suprizing conclusions are made.
So far I have published the first article. The whole theory will expand over 30 to 40 articles and gradually reveal a complete unification of physics and much more! If my theory will not be contradicted along the way it will aventually also have a great spiritial impact.
In addition the theory will have thecnological applications and will supply means for verification via physical experiments. It will not just remain as an idea. It will be contradicted or verified within a few years!
I invite you to read my first article on: www.Q-spaceTheory.org
The article was written for physicists, but anyone with knowledge in popular modern physics and basic math education will be able to understand it. So don't fear from reading it.

Feel free to response in this forum or/and contact me personally at QspaceTheory@gmail.com

Roi Lotan

[neutralino]

Welcome to the forums. Firstly, please do not post the same thread in different forums. I have deleted your other threads as this is the most suitable forum for the discussion.

I'll take a look at your website sometime later when I have more time.

[dleviwing]

Roi;
Welcome to ToeQuest.
The only way anyone can help you with your theory is to strongly encourage you to return to your formalize studies. I’m afraid that your article indicates that you have only a very limited comprehension of modern physics and its terminologies. If you’re not willing to learn the profession, don’t try to fix it; you’ll only embarrass yourself.

[Qspacer]

David, thank you for your reply and attemtion.

I would like to reply to you with a few questions: Does a non-scientist who did not study the terminology of newtonean physics know how to through a ball? Does a dancer know how to balance herself although she hasn't learnt physics? Do you not argree that a sailer may have a much better uderstanding of the physics of sea waves than a physicist who only studies the subject in theory? These people may not use your terminology, but may indeed have a better intuitive understanding of the phenomena.

However I do not only claim to have intuitive understanding. The published article has been examined by certain proffesors of physics in Israel. So far their response was much more open minded than yours and anyway no one has practicly contradicted my claims. If you have any real scientific argument against mine, then I chalange you to present it! I will not hesitate to admit my mistakes if you prove my logic to be wrong. On the contrary I invite anyone to take part in the public discussion. The simple fact is that so far no one has presented any claims against my logic as presented in article1.
I willl just remined you to stick to the arguments presented and discussed in article 1 and not reffer yet to the "highlights" in the appendix, since I predeclared that they will be discussed and explained later on and I am totally aware that they may seem to contradict the present physycs. Imagine Einstein presenting his final theoretical conclusions of relativity without explaining them. Who would have listened to him then? So please wait and the explanations and justifications will gradually be revealed.

As for continuing with my studies. If I will do so, I will not have the time to publish my theory at all. As it is I am already devoting only my spare time after work to this subject. Going back to study will delay everything for nearly a decade. The possibility that I do have the unification theory in my hands is too great to wait anylonger and only the unconfident fear embarracement. I will continue publishing as long as no one will contradict my logic and if the theory has any scientific value it will start impacting on physics within a few years, when it reaches practical tecnological applications.

I would just like to remind you that one of the greatest physicists of all times published one of the greatest works of all times while he had no academic degree or support. I am reffering to Einstein and the special relativity he published at 1905.

Thanks
Roi Lotan

[neutralino]

Originally Posted by Qspacer I would just like to remind you that one of the greatest physicists of all times published one of the greatest works of all times while he had no academic degree or support. I am reffering to Einstein and the special relativity he published at 1905.

This statement is the most annoying statement you can make to a physicist when presenting a new theory; and it is not correct. Einstein did have a degree in physics, and was only working at the patent office as he could not find a teaching position. Whilst Einstein did not have "support" (although he did correspond with some academics) he most certainly did have an academic background and a firm grasp of physics.

I've not read your work, but judging by your quotation about, and David's comments, it seems that this is another theory attempting to re-write physics by someone who doesn't have a grasp of the current understanding. I will read your work when I get time, but I would recommend that, if you have not already, you try and study modern physics.

Finally, you say that you have given your work to some professors and they have offered an open-minded response. Have you looked into getting your work published in a peer-reviewed journal? The word of some academics is not worth anything unless you have the publication to prove it.

[purveyor of knowledge]

I would like to write in defense of q-spacer.

It seems to me that there is a predominance of armchair physicists in the world today. What q-spacer is saying is entirely true, a sailor knows more about waves than anybody who studies them in a book, and just because somebody gains knowledge in a different way then most or just because he uses different terminology, we should not begrudge the fact. In fact, we would do much to listen to people who have come to a fresh understanding from a new and direct angle. It is well known science is in need of a complete overhaul and everything we know needs to be re-invented. That is the purpose of TOE.

Being that I have been in this area of TOE research for at least a couple of years now, I have developed a knack for getting a sense of people and for knowing if they are truly "enlightened" or not. It also helps when you yourself have discovered the TOE in a certain iteration and after that you find that your fellow kin tend to gravitate toward you, or you stumble upon them somehow. You start to follow the signs and the "coincidences." This forum for one has been a very good venue for us true TOE researchers to stumble upon one another. So pleased to meet you sir.

Do not listen to what the detractors are telling you. I know just by your words q-spacer that what you have discovered could be of extreme merit and could holds the hope for great promise and revelation. The fact that you say there will be technological implications really piques my interest and this is what I am always looking for. The true mark of a TOE is morale and technology.

What all these detractors are telling you is nothing new q-spacer. I have tried to show them on this board how I have discovered the TOE and I have been laughed at and made fun of in a most unkind and ungracious manner by the very people which are doing this to you now. Like I said, these people are armchair phsycists. They may know nothing of practical worth and when you point this out to them they may delete your posts. People like you and me however are actually willing to get our hands dirty. That is why I built a machine which powers gave me based on my theory which demonstrates it's principles and the reversibility of the laws of thermodynamics, whereby it can generate massive weather effects such as flooding, tornadoes, and huge lightning storms which stem from only a minute amount of input energy. I call it the "magnetic butterfly effect." I have even posted the pictures but people refuse to accept. So you see, even when you put the "proof" right in their face they will still ignore it. That is just the way it is I guess. No amount of proof is good enough and in fact these people will be likely to defame you before they have even read your theory.

So again, my main point is, keep doing what you are doing, and don't listen to the detractors. And I say DOWN WITH PEER REVIEWED JOURNALS, even though I have been published in one, I still think they are total crap. And despite what the overbearing detractors say THEY are actually the ones who are full of themselves and THEY are the ones who cling to biases and are non scientific. All of them armchair physicists.

peace love and prosperity, for the new breed

[dleviwing]

Originally Posted by Qspacer I would just like to remind you that one of the greatest physicists of all times published one of the greatest works of all times while he had no academic degree or support. I am reffering to Einstein and the special relativity he published at 1905.

Qspacer;
It would appear that you are just too smart to pay any attention to those of us that have wasted so much of our time learning all that science nonsense. I guess I’ll just have to let all my former colleges know how stupid and foolish they’ve been over the past 40 years or so. I’m so embarrassed to think that I believed Einstein actually was educated.

Roi Loton; The difference between you and Einstein is 80.

POK: I would expect nothing less of you!

[Qspacer]

About Einstein: it is a common mistake to claim that he finished his academic degree before publishing his articles in 1905. He did study for 4 years but couldn't finish his degree. He studied in the polytechnic institution in Zurich where a thesis was demanded for the graduation. Einstein couldn't find any doctor that was willing to cooperate with his "crazy" ideas for a thesis, thus he was forced to leave the institution without graduating. Any one that will truly check this information will find it valid! Personally I know it from two sources: A BBC program published on 2005 about Einstein's equation "E=mc^2". And from the details published in the exhibition about Einstein at 2005, in the Israeli science museum. Anyone that really wants to know what Einstein himself had to say about the Academic institutions is referred to the book "Albert Einstein/ Ideas and opinions". I read this book in Hebrew and I hope that the English edition is similar.

To my dear new opponents I say again: If anyone can contradict my arguments in the first article (not including the appendix), please come forward and show how. I will immediately admit my mistakes if there are any… Any other response is just playing with ego and no more than that.

[neutralino]

Here is a link to Einstein's biography from the nobel prize website. It clearly states that he obtained his first degree (or diploma, since he was in the german system) in 1901, followed by his doctorate in 1905.

[dleviwing]

I believe if you study these text books, you will not need us to point out your obvious misconceptions. I believe “intuitive knowledge” translates to what we call “common sense” and that requires “common knowledge”; get some!

http://lightandmatter.com/books.html