Dates: 20050523 – 20050527
Where: Storrs, CT, United States Venue: University of Connecticut, Mathematics Department
Description
The Natural Philosophy Alliance (NPA) is devoted mainly to broadranging, fully openminded criticism, at the most fundamental levels , of the often irrational and unrealistic doctrines of modern physics and cosmology; and to the ultimate replacement of these doctrines by much sounder ideas developed with full respect for evidence, logic, and objectivity. Such reforms have long been urgently needed; and yet there is no area of scholarship more stubbornly censorial, and more reluctant to reform itself.
Conference Authors and Papers
?NonBohr? Model of Hydrogen Atom 
Jaroslav G. Klyushin 
Corollaries of papers [1] and [2] are not only an electron model, but a proton model as well [35]. The proton is also a torus. Angular velocity amplitude of its equatorial rotation is 1836 times less than of electron. But angular velocity of its meridian rotation is 3765 times bigger. This last fact makes the situation in ether in the vicinity of the proton essentially other than in the case of electron. Local light velocity in the vicinity of electron is equal to light velocity c in free ether. But it is equal to sqrt2 c in the vicinity of the proton. It is evident that it must come to at a certain distance from proton. But this convergence turns out to be discrete and non monotonic. In other terms, the proton gives rise to a system of standing waves or curls in the surrounding ether. A local light velocity in this curls decrease to c/137 and then increase up to c making 137 steps. These 137 curls or force lines in Faraday terms differ from all the other in that their radius is greater and angular velocity is less than of electron. This means that electron can be inside these and only these curls. In particular this means that electron in unstirred hydrogen atom is in rest inside the first atomic force line with local light velocity c/137 . In multielectronic atoms, electrons with nonzero orbital momentum move inside their maternal force line. But in order electron could move infinitely long it must move under conditions of superconductivity. It was shown in [6] that such electron must move with double local light velocity. When it is knocked out of its maternal force line it comes to new force line with less velocity than it is necessary for superconductive movement on this new line. It moves on the new line with friction. The accumulated energy is radiated and the electron comes back perhaps not on the very material but lower force line (force line with lower local light velocity).References

A Classical Electromagnetic Theory of Everything 
Charles William Lucas 
The notion that the Universe is electrodynamic in nature is developed, by taking into account the finite size of elementary particles and the feedback effects of their selffields due to that finite size. This has led to the derivation of a new universal electrodynamic force law from the empirical laws of electrodynamics that holds for all scale sizes. It replaces the current relativistic theories of the electrodynamic, gravitational, strong nuclear and weak nuclear force. This new universal force leads to a new theory of elementary particles based on the combinatorial geometry of intertwining continuous charge fibers forming a toroidal ring. This new theory of elementary particles leads in turn to the formation of a new theory of the nucleus and the atom that is also based on combinatorial geometry. The bonding of atoms to form molecules is explained in terms of the coupling of the magnetic fields of electrons. The structure of complex organic molecules such as DNA, proteins, carbohydrates, sugars, and bacteria are explained in terms of spiraling intertwining fibers. These same spiraling fibers are able to explain the properties of the solar system better than Newton?s Universal Law of Gravitation and Einstein?s General Theory of Relativity. Hubble Space Telescope pictures of ring and spiral galaxies record their fiber structure. 
A Classical Theory of Everything: Parts 1 & 2 
Dara Lam 
Primarily because of the inability of the Physicists to explain the results of the Michelson Morley Experiment (MMEx) in the beginning of Twentieth century, the Special Theory of Relativity was accepted. It was then assumed that Light could travel in space as a waveform, without the presence of any medium like Ether, and it would do so at the same constant velocity for all the observers traveling uniformly relative to each other in space. Both these presumptions appeared to be unreasonable by ordinary commonsense. It is however possible to explain the results of MMEx using the old classical WaveTheory of light. When a mirror that is moving in the medium of space reflects light, the reflected frequency in the medium differs from the incident frequency in the medium, due to the Doppler effect. Further the reflected angle from moving mirror in the medium is also different from the incident angle in the medium, which in case of a static mirror are same. An observer who is static in the medium sees these changes, whereas an observer moving with the mirror will find that the incident and reflected frequencies and the angles remain the same. The two arms at right angles in the Interferometer of the MMEx are adjusted to be exactly the same length, but when it is moving in the medium, the two split light beams travel different path lengths, depending on the velocity of the equipment in the medium. The same velocity also causes Doppler changes in the frequencies. As a result though the two path lengths traveled by two light beams are different, the number of wavelengths covered in each path are exactly equal, at any velocity. So interference does not occur at all. This is fully calculated and explained in the Part 2 of the Article. An experiment to verify the existence of Ether in similar manner as MMEx is proposed; see Para 2.8. 
A Classical Theory of Everything: Parts 3 & 4 
Dara Lam 
The bound electrons in an atom have quantized energy levels, as amply demonstrated in Spectroscopy. But there is no real justification to assume that the Electromagnetic energy is quantized and it may be observed as a continuous wavemotion as well as quantized Photons. In PhotoElectricity the outer shell bound electron of an atom has very limited space around it to absorb adequate energy from an incident Electromagnetic waveform of lower frequency, irrespective of its intensity. Only a higher frequency will enable the electron to vibrate in the limited available space, to absorb sufficient energy, to leave the surface of the material. The waveform is continuous and not quantized, but the absorption of energy by the electron has to be of a minimum value for the electron to photoemit. Similar explanations are given in the Article Part 2, of other observed phenomena, which can be explained using classical Physics and does not need any quantization assumptions. A model of Ether is proposed which though a continuum is linearly compressible when a material particle is embedded in it. Energy is stored in this compression. This Ether is capable of: 1) Storing the Gravitational Energy of the embedded material particles; 2) Permitting free movement of the embedded particles in accordance with the Newtonian Laws of Motion; 3) Storing the Kinetic Energy of the particle moving in it, relative to its original static condition; 4) Storing Electrostatic energy of a charged particle; 5) Storing Magnetostatic energy of a moving charged particle; 6) Transferring the Electromagnetic Wave energy at the constant velocity in empty Ether. This Ether has been explained in the Part 4. As this explains the storage and conversion of Gravitational, Kinetic and Electromagnetic energy of a material particle in Ether, it may be considered to be a Classical Theory of Everything. 
A New Mathematical Definition of the Concept of Force 
Robert J. Heaston 
The concept of force may be mathematically expressed in such a way that a force may be defined for every quantity that a field conserves. The components (in italics) of this definition are defined individually in statements that may be translated into mathematical language: 1) Define a field of space; 2) Define a scalar potential that is a function of position at each point in this field; 3) Define a field constant that is constant over the whole field; 4) Define the field potential as the product of the field constant and the scalar potential; 5) Define a force as the negative gradient of the field potential; 6) Define the field strength as the force per unit field constant. The field strength is also the negative gradient of the scalar potential, or the gradient vector. If it is assumed that the field constant is a quantity that is conserved by a field, then forces may be derived for each of these conserved quantities. This approach is just the inverse of current practice. Several different forces may be derived that conform to the same six steps above, based upon the conservation of mass, mass flux, momentum, angular momentum, spring constant, energy, quantum, et al. 
A Philosophical Reconstruction of Theoretical Physics (Cleaning Up the Mess that Albert Made) 
Henry H. Lindner 
The foundational assumptions of Albert Einstein’s physics were:
All phenomena, including light, should be treated as due to particles flying through the void. Einstein contradicted these axioms throughout his career?but never altered them?thus creating the confusion we observe today. I propose that we members of the Natural Philosophy Alliance discuss and attempt to agree upon the following evidencedbased hypotheses for a new theoretical physics:

A Reformulation and Vindication of Einstein?s Experimentum Crucis 
Sadanand S. Savarkar 
The Natural Philosophy Alliance (NPA) sponsors regular international conferences for presenting highquality papers discussing aspects of philosophy in the sciences. Many papers offer challenges to accepted orthodoxy in the sciences, especially in physics. Everything from the microphysics of quantum mechanics to the macrophysics of cosmology is entertained. Though the main interest of the NPA is in challenging orthodoxy in the sciences, it will also feature papers defending such orthodoxy. Our ultimate purpose is to enable participants to articulate their own understanding of the truth. All papers are reviewed by society officers, and sometimes by other members, before presentation in conferences, and they are edited, sometimes very significantly, prior to publication in the Proceedings of the NPA. NPA is, in turn, the only component of the nonprofit corporation: The Natural Philosophy Foundation, Inc., (NPF). The NPF was incorporated in the State of Maryland on July 17, 1995 with the intent to become a longterm science fostering charity organization 
A Requiem for the Misconceived Twins 
Sadanand S. Savarkar 
The Natural Philosophy Alliance (NPA) sponsors regular international conferences for presenting highquality papers discussing aspects of philosophy in the sciences. Many papers offer challenges to accepted orthodoxy in the sciences, especially in physics. Everything from the microphysics of quantum mechanics to the macrophysics of cosmology is entertained. Though the main interest of the NPA is in challenging orthodoxy in the sciences, it will also feature papers defending such orthodoxy. Our ultimate purpose is to enable participants to articulate their own understanding of the truth. All papers are reviewed by society officers, and sometimes by other members, before presentation in conferences, and they are edited, sometimes very significantly, prior to publication in the Proceedings of the NPA. NPA is, in turn, the only component of the nonprofit corporation: The Natural Philosophy Foundation, Inc., (NPF). The NPF was incorporated in the State of Maryland on July 17, 1995 with the intent to become a longterm science fostering charity organization 
A Theory of Space and Time: Answering the Challenge of the President of the NPA 
Stephan J. G. Gift 
This paper decidedly answers the challenge of the President of the Natural Philosophy Alliance to find a replacement theory for the Special Theory of Relativity by the year 2005, around which a majority of ?nonrelativists’ can converge and coalesce. We do so by drawing attention to an existing consistent theory of space and time that is derived from the work of Maxwell, Lorentz, Fitzgerald, Larmour and Ives. It is a semiclassical etherbased theory that is in precise agreement with special relativity over its full range of correct predictions and importantly is viewed by the physics establishment as being a viable alternative. We take a critical step necessary for the acceptance of this semiclassical theory by demonstrating detection of its associated preferred reference framethe etherprecisely the frame that Michelson and Morley failed to detect in 1887 and which special relativity strictly forbids. This detection is accomplished using two wellknown physical phenomena. The detection of the ether, which has eluded discovery for over 100 years, immediately invalidates special relativity since this theory prohibits the existence of a preferred reference frame. As Martin Gardener said, “if Michelson and Morley had detected an ether wind, the special theory would have been ruled out from the start”. 
Adriaan van Maanen’s Challenge to the Expanding Universe 
Robert S. Fritzius 
Between 1916 and 1927, Mt. Wilson astronomer Adriaan van Maanen published twelve papers on astrometric measurements of internal motions in what were known then as spiral nebulae. Of special note were the Messier objects M33, M51, M81, and M101. His measured internal motions were of such a magnitude (averaging about 20 milliarcsecs per year in the peripheries of the objects) that one could imply that the nebulae were close enough to us to be physically associated with the Milky Way. In the 1920 ShapleyCurtis ?Scale of the Universe? debate, Shapley relied heavily on van Maanen’s nebular internal motions in his argument for a small universe (Milky Way plus local denizens.) However, by 1937 the quest to prove the existence of an expanding universe, which was driven by a desire to satisfy EinsteinLema?tre cosmology, aided by Hubble’s interpretation of cosmological redshift as a velocity effect, buried van Maanen’s findings. Astronomers, in general, decided that van Maanen had made some kind of never explained procedural error and there was no reason to do any further internal motion measurements on spiral nebulae. Spiral nebulae became renamed ?galaxies? and in general were relegated to great distances from the Milky Way as other island universes. Van Maanen never recanted his findings. It seems that ongoing angular velocity measurements of galaxies can validate van Maanen’s measurements or finally put them to rest. If they are validated, then Big Bang theory is in serious trouble from a new quarter. 
An Experimental Setup for Measuring the OneWay Phase Velocity of a Microwave Signal 
Hartwig Wolfgang Thim, Norbert Feist 
The MichelsonMorley null result is readily explained as a classical Doppler effect due to the fact that the outandback phase velocity is isotropic and thus in both arms of the Michelson Interferometer equal to c?= c (1v^{2}/c^{2}). It is important to emphasize that the phase velocities rather than the group velocities must be considered which are different from each other in the transverse arm whereas they are identical in the longitudinal arm. This means that the Michelson Interferometer is in principle ? unsuited to detect an absolute frame of reference or etherdrift. In order to reliably detect an absolute frame of reference where the speed of light is isotropic an experimental setup allowing to measure the onewayphase velocity of an electromagnetic wave must be used. In this presentation a microwave setup will be described which uses a 12.5 GHz signal traveling along a 3 m long signal path. Both generator and oscilloscope are synchronized by a specially designed 3 m long ?microelectromechanical? transmission line providing a nonelectromagnetic signal path. This setup should be capable of detecting the absolute velocity of our solar system relative to the Cosmic Microwave Background (~360km/s) in a similar manner as Marinov had done it already in 1975. 
Basic Statements Required for a Minimum Contradictions Everything 
Athanassios A. Nassikas 
It is commonly accepted that so many scientists disagree on various physics theories proposed. The reason why someone believes that a perfect theory can be stated is based on his faith that the basic communication system, through which any theory can be stated, is perfect; if this system is contradictory it is meaningless to try for a perfect theory since it would be stated through a contradictory system. The basic communication system consists of logic , i.e. classical logic plus Leibniz sufficient reason principle, and of an axiom that states that there is anteriorposterior; in fact for everything we seek the reason of its power and we put one phrase or one word after another. In previous works, efforts have been made to show that this communication system is inherently contradictory. If this is the case, a least contradictory physics can be stated through a claim for minimum contradictions; this implies that this physics can be stated through the basic communication principles, i.e. through logic and the anteriorposterior axiom, and in extension through space time terms. Thus mattereverything is spacetime itself, which is stochastic i.e. not continuum. Note that Einstein had expressed his thoughts on this. On this basis, a minimum contradictions physics can be stated and this is, under certain simplifications, compatible either with the GRT or the QM; forces unification can be achieved, arrow of time, electric clusters stability, cold fusion, Biefeld?Brown effect can be explained. All these are based on two statements proving that the basic communication system is contradictory and on the claim for minimum contradictions. Thus there might be a constructive question to the scientific community of whether these statements proof, which constitutes the main part of this paper, is valid or not. 
Bending of a LightRay Passing a Black Hole 
Dan Romalo 
Assuming the hypothesis of a law of ether absorptionspeed in the vicinity of massive celestial bodies and using an elementary, intuitive, calculus procedure, the bending of a lightray passing near a black hole is evaluated. The theoretical results so obtained are, in some aspects, stunning because they suggest that some strong astronomic anomalies may, or should be observable by adequate means. And also because some accepted cosmologic fundamentals may become questionable. The so arisen problems are just suggested without any pretense to be rigid statements. This paper is aka “Most ElementarilyIntuitive, Tentative Approach to Evaluate the Bending of a LightRay Passing a Black Hole” 
Big Bang or Full Stop? 
Alphonsus G. Kelly 
Hubble’s Law’ states that the further away a galaxy is, the faster it is receding from Earth. But, the red shift of light from galaxies indicates their recession speeds, at the time of emission of the light. The correct interpretation is, therefore, that the farther away a galaxy was at the time of emission of the light, the faster it was recessing. The nearest galaxies give us the most recent information; the more recent the information, the slower the recession. A logical conclusion is that the recession of galaxies has decreased gradually to a present steady state. This means that the ?Big Bang’ theory is not sustainable and that the Universe is not expanding.Reprinted in Proceedings of the NPA, V2, pp. 6779 as “Full Stop or Big Bang?” 
Classical Physics Explanation of Electromagnetic Quanta 
Enrique MoralesRiveira 
This paper deals with a non quantum physics derivation and demonstration of the real physical origin of electromagnetic quanta, eliminating for good all the paradoxes, the confusion and the irrationality of the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics, which states that electromagnetic quanta and ponderable subatomic particles are dual physical objects behaving sometimes as particles, and other times as waves, depending on the characteristics and specifications of the corresponding experimental setups. Consequently, according to that interpretation, it is meaningless, for example, to ask what a photon or a particle really is. What really matters is what we can say about the physical phenomena observed. Physicists then have clear choices: either they can experimentally leave the subatomic particles and the photons alone and observe the interference patterns; or visually observe the particles? trajectories in space, washing out the corresponding interference patterns. The two situations are complementary. Similarly, according to same physical interpretation of quantum mechanics, there also exist position and linear momentum complementarities in such a way that if the position of a particle is determined, then, its linear momentum is uncertain, and vice versa. The time and space contraction of the electromagnetic radiation emitted by spinning and rotating electrically charged particles, such as electrons and protons, explains without any ambiguity whatsoever the origin and nature of photons or quanta of electromagnetic radiation; and rationally solves, once and for all, the mystery of the waveparticle duality of quantum physics, just as will be demonstrated throughout this paper without beating about the bush. 
Comments on General Relativity 
John R. Warfield 
Originally presented as two papers:On General Relativity
Why are gravity and inertia equivalent, and why are gravitational mass and inertial mass equal? This paper argues for the following answers:
Consequences of Relativity The purpose of this paper is to utilize the concepts demonstrated in my papers on General Relativity, Special Relativity and Flowing Space to hypothesize other consequences. Eight consequences are described:

Consequences of Founding SRT on the Whole Einstein?s 1905 Paper on Relativity 
Alex Constantin V. Ceapa 
Most parts of modern physics were built on the special relativity theory (SRT), which was based on Einstein?s 1905 paper on relativity, less the derivation of the Lorentz transformation (LT) in that paper. My recent derivation of the LT [GED 16, pp. 311 (2005)] – tracing by light the radius vectors of moving geometrical points – discloses the objective physics warranting the ?mysterious? manipulation of some equations that led Einstein to the LT in 1905. The correctness of that derivation of the LT enables founding SRT on the whole of Einstein?s 1905 paper on relativity. The perennial criticism of the SRT fails. The meaning of Cartesian coordinate that results for the term of the LT [where ], and that of Newtonian time that results for the term (time in which light travels coordinate ), validated the classical principle of the physical determination of equations in SRT [11th Conf. NPA]. By the energymomentum relationship, the principle is valid in the relativistic quantum theories, too. There results genuine information – condensed in models of ?elementary? particles (electron, photon, etc.) from the terms of their basic equations, which remains to be tested by new experimental techniques and applied to radically novel technologies. 
Consequences of Relativity 
John R. Warfield 
The purpose of this paper is to utilize the concepts demonstrated in my papers on General Relativity, Special Relativity and Flowing Space to hypothesize other consequences.Eight consequences are described:

Consequences of Relativity?s Failure To Control Assumptions 
Neil E. Munch 
Like an Escher print with its contradictory viewing assumptions, relativity and related cosmology theories are also flawed by use of contradictory assumptions. For example, the light wave equations were an assumed basis of special relativity (SRT) equations. So, the time terms in SRT must be the elapsed time of light travel along the length term regardless of its direction, not clock time or clock rates or the age of twins as often assumed. Consequently, its Lorentz transformation (ELT) is critically flawed. When light passes to and fro over a moving length, the universality of its derivation assumptions requires that length to both contract and dilate at the same instant. That?s impossible. SRT?s erroneous shift to focus on clocks and their simultaneity has sidetracked progress in modern physics for decades. Zero rest mass of a photon, assumed to avoid SRT?s requirement for infinite mass at light speed c, is contradicted by the finite rest mass of photons in BoseEinstein condensate experiments. The presumption by SRT that objects cannot exceed speed c can be rejected by the above flaws and because superluminal speed luminosities are frequently observed in astronomy. Yet, the myth remains that an object?s speed is limited to c. It?s quite clear that Minkowski?s spacetime concepts contradict ELT basis in light wave equations, if one only looks. Spacetime is easily rejected yet it remains as truth in text books. SRT basis on constant velocity and constant c constrain its use to rectilinear motion. Yet, SRT and its erroneous spacetime concepts formed the basis of general relativity (GRT) and the subsequent Big Bang concepts. Both have questionable validity. All such contradictory assumptions and their consequences could have been avoided by good assumptions control. 
Consequences of the Redefinition of the Four Fundamental Forces 
Robert J. Heaston 
The four fundamental forces are normally known as the gravitational force, electromagnetic force, strong force, and the weak force. These forces have so many differences in physical characteristics that very complex mathematics is required to unify two or more of them. If it is assumed that the familiar Einstein and Planck energy functions actually represent the potential energies of fundamental forces, then the four fundamental forces may be redefined as the gravitational, electromagnetic, strong, and the quantum force laws. Three of these forces are inverse square and one is inverse linear. These redefined forces interact to yield over 100 functions of physics. Moreover, the quantum is introduced directly into the concept of force. Five different approaches may be used to derive these forces, but that is not the intent here. The objective of this paper is to take the big picture approach and identify pieces missing in the current understanding of the design of the universe. Whether this approach is valid or not, some interesting consequences are revealed that may be pursued by other paths. 
Corrected Big Bang Model 
Charles Sven 
The unsatisfying original Big Bang Model, when pruned of its unsupported mathematical assumptions, and grafted with NEW Hi Tech findings, generates a corrected Big Bang Model. Assumptions to prune: Einstein’s old letter to de Sitter contained the remark ?This circumstance [of an expanding Universe] irritates me.? And in another letter about the expanding Universe, he said ?To admit such possibilities seems senseless.? #1 Supporter – Arthur Eddington, said in Nature 127, 1931, 450, ?Philosophically, the notion of a beginning of present order of Nature is repugnant to me. I should like to find a genuine loophole.? In 2004 Simon Singh reported in Big Bang, page 281, that ?Eddington also claimed that his version of events could explain something emerging from nothing, thanks to some rather dubious logic.? And in 1993, Eduard Tropp et al reported in Alexander A Friedmann, pp. 1567, ?Friedmann formulates results of his first cosmological paper in just a few sentences: … “This brings to mind what Hindu mythology has to say about cycles of existence, and it also becomes possible to speak about the creation of the world from nothing.? Hi Tech to graft includes: Earth is Center of the CMB AND of 2dF Quasar Redshift Grafts; Push equals distribution – Supernovae distribution is a mirror image of GRB power graph [Trigger 1406]. Plus much more evidence. 
Derivation of a Universal Electromagnetic Force Law for FiniteSize Elastic Charged Particles 
Charles William Lucas 
A new electromagnetic force law for real finitesize elastic charged particles is derived by solving simultaneously the fundamental empirical laws of classical electrodynamics, i.e. Gauss’s laws, Ampere’s generalized law, Faraday’s law, Lorentz’s law, and Lenz’s law assuming Galilean invariance and noting that both the superposition principle for electromagnetic fields and the pointparticle assumption assumed by Maxwell are experimentally false. This derived version of the electromagnetic force law contains extensions to Weber’s force law that account for gravity, inertia, relativistic effects including radiation, and also the nonradial terms that explain the experimentally observed curling of plasma currents. The derived force law satisfies Newton’s third law, conservation of energy and momentum, and Mach’s Principle. Galilean invariance is shown to mathematically require that the electromagnetic force be a contact force based on field extensions of the charge instead of actionatadistance and is used to derive the Lorentz force law. From the perspective of the derived electromagnetic potential between two moving charges, it appears that the ‘relativistic’ corrections to the Coulomb static potential are just geometrical terms that take into account the effective distance between the charges due to the corkscrew motion of the moving charges and the induced field effects of Lenz’s law. 
Description of the Overall Electromagnetic Spectrum in Terms of Discrete Theoretical Bands 
Robert J. Heaston 
The normal interpretation of the electromagnetic spectrum is a continuum defined by the Planck energy relationship. A different explanation starts with the classical radius of the electron, the Compton wavelength, and the Bohr radius. These three lengths may be related as follows. Any wavelength is equal to the Compton wavelength divided by the fine structure constant to the power. Consequently, 2 gives the classical radius, 0 is the Compton wavelength, and 2 is the Bohr radius, or minimum Bohr orbit. The maximum atomic orbit occurs at 4. The electromagnetic spectrum is composed of gamma rays (0 to 2), xrays (2 to 4), ultraviolet (4 to 6), infrared (6 to 8), millimeter waves (8 to 10), and the Radio Spectrum with a oneband overlap (9 to 19). The electromagnetic spectrum may be extended at the high frequency end by another 21 bands to the Planck scale and extended on the low frequency end by 17 bands to the size of the Universe. The three sections define a universal spectrum. 
Developments on the Postulate on the Velocity of Light in the Twentieth Century 
Domina Eberle Spencer, Uma Y. Shama 
Galileo was the first person to attempt to measure the velocity of light. Einstein was remarkable in 1905 in recognizing that a postulate on the velocity of light was necessary. But only two years later in 1907 he found it necessary to revise his original postulate. The very next year in 1908 Ritz proposed a radically different postulate. It was nearly half a century later that the universal time postulate was first proposed by Moon and Spencer in 1956. It was not until 1990 that the general formulation of the universal time postulate was developed by Moon, Spencer and Moon. Today we know that electromagnetic signals from moving sources can be synchronized. The paper reviews the experimental evidence for accepting the universal time postulate. 
Earth IS Expanding Rapidly: Kant’s Nebular Hypothesis and Subduction are False 
Lawrence S. Myers 
Kant’s Nebular Hypothesis (1755) is proved false by organic life in the lowest layers of the Grand Canyon, and that shows Earth’s diameter has increased by accretion of extraterrestrial mass throughout its lifetime. Additional proof of expansion is shown by ocean trenches off Asia and Australia matching western coasts of North and South America, proving both Pacific and Atlantic Ocean basins formed during the same ~200250 Ma time period, and confirmed by ocean sediment ages. This is conclusive evidence ~250 Ma NONE of today’s oceans existed and Earth’s diameter was ~40% sMüller. Oceans now cover 71% of Earth and H2O degassed via midocean ridges equaled basin growth. Subduction is physically impossible, and is the most egregious error in the history of science. ACCREATION (creation by accretion) is introduced showing all planetary bodies develop from comets that grow by accretion into meteoroids, asteroids, planets, and eventually Suns. At diameters of ~500600 kilometers, all meteoroids become spherical, the critical point where gravity focuses omnidirectionally on its exact center and gravitationallygenerated compressive heating commences core melting and heat expansion. Core expansion rapidly overtakes external accretion as the primary mechanism of planetary growth. 
Earthquakes on Parkfield Segment of the San Andreas Fault and Lunar Phase 
Martin Kokus 
For decades an enigma has persisted about the lunar phase during major quakes on the Parkfield segment of the San Andreas Fault. The lunar phases at the time of the quakes cluster with high statistical significance 45 degrees prior to full and new moon. There are no local tidal maximums or minimums at these times nor is the earth as a whole contorted into an extreme shape. The earth’s moment of inertia is also not at an extreme. This phenomenon has no explanation within the accepted theory of plate tectonics. It has been the motivation for many wild conjectures including totally new theories of gravity. As it turns out, the explanation may be much more mundane (pun intended). When the moon is at these positions, the tidal bulges are the furthest from the moon and the torque that the moon exerts perpendicular to the earth’s axis is maximized. This coincidence can now be viewed as consistent with all of the main alternatives to plate tectonics: surge tectonics, pulsating earth, angular momentum theories, and especially earth expansion. 
Einstein and the Photoelectric Effect 
Robert Schor 
Einstein’s explanation of the photoelectric effect will be reviewed, and the significance of the introduction of the photon to further developments in theoretical physics will be discussed. 
Einstein Goofed 
Boon Leong Lan 
According to Einstein, if the speed of a particle remains low, i.e., much less than the speed of light, then the dynamical prediction of special relativistic mechanics remains very well approximated by the prediction of Newtonian mechanics for the same parameter(s) and initial conditions. However, in this paper, it is shown with two counterexample Hamiltonian dynamical systems that, contrary to Einstein?s claim, Newtonian dynamics can eventually disagree completely with relativistic dynamics even though the particle speed is low. This result points to a new possibility of testing special relativity in the domain of low speed. 
Einstein’s Relativity 
Joseph F. Cuny 
Einstein’s 1905 paper forms the philosophical foundation for all of relativity. Virtually all other material either ?explains? or applies the theory that is based on that paper, often with particular interest on the complex mathematics. This presentation is aimed at attempting to understand the original paper and why it was so important. To assure validity of the presentation there are only two types of references: basic physics and the paper ?On The Electrodynamics Of Moving Bodies?, the translation of his paper as published in the Dover paperback The Principle of Relativity. 
Elementary Concepts of Material World 
Aleksandar Vukelja 
In order to discuss laws that rule material world we must first define the concept of matter itself. To do so, we will create an abstract model ? a completely theoretical paradigm that will allow us to understand how natural laws function. We will develop this abstract model starting with a simple definition and continuing throughout this book to add features and properties ? until the model matches the actual physical reality in all important issues that we will discuss. 
Eliminating Fallacies on Gravitational Effect 
Bert Schreiber 
There is only one force effect for gravity, pull. The source of this force is mass. Many current false beliefs, now promulgated as facts, will be eliminated. There is the singular static force for a mass. To measure or apply the effect takes two masses. The Gravitational Constant is an artifact and never should have come into existence in the first place. There are two systems that operate in the Universe; the Mass Energy System and the Mass Gravity System. The effect of inertia, and when it can be overcome, is shown. For mass, gravity end effects, Newton?s Third Law of Force and Motion, can be violated. This sets a limit to the Equivalence Principle (Featherapple Paradox) and destroys the Strong Equivalence Principle. 
Errors of Physics Entrenched for Decades ? Plus Corrections 
Martin Müller 
The following notions or conceptions introduced into the teachings of physics between approximately the 1860?s and the 1970?s will be considered, and their correctness investigated.
Practically all cited items or complexes would, for a thorough treatment, require chains of equations as well as graphical displays. The author refrains from offering any in the present paper, since they are available in his books. 
Excess Mass Stress Tectonics – EMST 
Stavros T. Tassos, David Ford 
Excess Mass Stress Tectonics’ – EMST concerns the electromagnetic processes which have been altering lowiron silicates into becoming highiron silicates, and how this ongoing geodynamic and geochemical metamorphosis of Earth is being expressed, in terms of earthquakes, geotectonic, volcanic, and magmatic processes, in the context of a solid, quantized, and expanding Earth. 
Field Structure Theory (FST) 
Don Briddell 
Based on the discovery of a new class of forms involving the organization of action loop(s) into circuited threedimensional nucleated wave structures with promising applications to physics. A new class of form and structure has been discovered, here called ?Field Structures?, that offer a promising new way to model (and think about) the nature of fields. Considering action to be a line (path) of force, and searching for the ways a line of force may express itself, it was found that when the edges of any polyhedra are skewed at their vertices so that the edge lines do not intersect (but rather interact) and these edges are then continued to distal edges, continuous loops of action result. In the process, these loops of action twist, torque, spin, and knot into a standing waves that form a spatial volumetric polyhedral events having prominent masslike characteristics while at the same time retaining their energetic natures. Pushpull and twist forces are modeled, which have radiant (boson) and stable (fermion) forms of structures. The mechanics of bonding, chirality, at the particle, atomic and molecular level has been productively explored and will be demonstrated. These structures are then used to build fractal hierarchies of action (energy) fields that correspond to primary physical forms. These structures, for the first time, behave as a field while expressing the fundamentals of a particle, resolving the longstanding and vexing mechanical dichotomy between particle and wave. This paper will outline the basics of Field Structures and then explore how these forms are useful for understanding the physics of the natural world. It will conclude by suggesting that the problem with physics is systemic. By having the correct model of how action arises, structures itself, and produces structure, it will be possible to follow the model incrementally and accurately up towards the solar, galactic and beyond, and down the scale of form and structure, from our familiar organic scale of structure, to the molecular, atomic, particle, and ultimately to the Absolute Action Matrix itself (the action plenum). A PowerPoint slide presentation will be accompanied by working models of Field Structures. 
Generalization and New Applications of Einstein’s Theory of Brownian Motion 
Mahmoud A. Melehy 
Above absolute zero, molecules, ions, conduction electrons and other particles, in any liquid, gas, or solid, have significant thermal motion, which can be translational, vibrational, and/or rotational. For example, in an ideal H_{2} gas in equilibrium, at 300 K, the rootmeansquare of the translational velocity, per particle, v_{rms} is about 1.93 km/s. More significantly, for conduction electrons in copper, v_{rms} is about 1.22 x 10^{3} km/s. Since all such particles have finite masses, then thermal motion is inevitably associated with highly appreciable particle kinetic energy and momentum. Classical thermodynamics as evolved in the 19th century, has accounted for, among common parameters, the particle kinetic energy, while totally ignoring the particle thermal momentum. In 1905, however, in his theory of Brownian motion, Einstein introduced that important thermophysical concept into thermodynamics. Specifically, he calculated the force acting on particles suspended, or dissolved in a liquid, under the diffusion action. To derive that force, Einstein followed substantially the same mechanical approach used by Maxwell in 1960, who determined the force acting on a ideal gas diffusing in another. This paper shows that a generalized form of the MaxwellEinstein diffusion force, applicable to most systems, can be derived thermodynamically, by accounting for the timerate of change of the particle thermal momentum. The resulting, generalized diffusion force f_{D}, per particle, has proved to be highly significant, particularly in interfacial systems. Determining how f_{D} would interact in any system, under equilibrium and nonequilibrium conditions, with electric, and other fields involving actionatadistance, has led to a new general thermodynamic theory.^{1,2} Applying that theory to semiconductor diodes and solar cells has predicted the voltagecurrent characteristics of such devices. Theory has accurately been corroborated by extensive experimental characteristics reported by some 27 authors in a period exceeding a quarter century.^{1,2} The experiments were conducted in the temperature range: 4.2 and 800K. In one experiment the maximumtominimum current ratio exceeded 10 orders of magnitude. More recently, the present thermodynamic theory has revealed a new fundamental result: that the first and second laws require the existence of electric charges at almost all surfaces, membranes, and other interfaces. This interesting result, which is verifiable experimentally, can now explain numerous, diversified phenomena, of interdisciplinary interest,^{3} such as: surface tension, capillarity, which is essential to plant and animal life, light particle adhesion, the suspension of fog, atmospheric electricity, the forces that shape tornados, and even one phenomenon first reported in Ancient Greece, by Thales of Miletus, some 26 centuries ago: the generation of static electricity by rubbing two different insulators against one another. The thermodynamically required interfacial electrification further confirms Newton’s speculation in the 18th century that interfacial forces might be electric in nature.References:

GRT?s ?Flat Spot? 
Cynthia K. Whitney 
In classical physics, a potential is an entity whose physical effects are revealed by its derivatives. For example, the gradient of Newtonian gravitational potential is gravitational force per unit mass responding, the gradient of Coulomb potential is an electric field, the time derivative of Ampere vector potential augments that electric field, and the curl of that vector potential is the magnetic field. In quantum physics, the vector potential can produce an effect directly: a phase shift. This is, perhaps, an example of a potential producing a physical effect without any differentiation. Likewise in GRT, the gravitational potential can produce physical effects directly: it can slow clocks, redden light emitted, or bend light passing by, and contribute to orbit precessions. All this is very confounding. We might, perhaps, be well advised to create a different word for ?potentials? that require no differentiation to cause a physical effect. On the other hand, it could be that the physical effects observed ought to be attributed, not to potentials per se, but rather to appropriate second derivatives thereof. This paper discusses candidate second order expressions to account for the GRT effects. The new secondorder expressions work in the scenarios for which we presently have data (primarily GPS scenarios), but could be discriminated from GRT in a new, but available, scenario: we need to document how an atomic clock runs at the saddlepoint of the gravitational potential between two source masses, such as Earth and Moon. 
High Redshift Galaxies May be Clusters of Galaxies 
Eit Gaastra 
Astronomical observing techniques have much improved the last decade. Objects in the faraway universe are spotted at redshifts up to z=12. Within big bang cosmology no objects can be further away than 13.7 billion lightyears. However, objects with a redshift of z=12 rather may be at a distance of 140 billion lightyears with tired light redshift instead of expansion redshift. Big bang astronomers mark certain objects in their early big bang universe as galaxies. A substantial part of those “galaxies” may turn out to be clusters of galaxies in an infinite universe. 
Light Wave Discontinuities and their Solution 
Neil E. Munch 
The ?twoframe light travel problem? is best seen by considering spherical waves from a moving source as seen by an observer Q on that ?moving? frame and by an observer P on a ?stationary? frame. When those two simultaneous views are precisely plotted on a single graph, it?s clear that each part of a wave must be at two locations at the same instant as described in more detail in this paper. That?s true whether relativistic or nonrelativistic equations are used — as long as aether is not assumed. Such wave discontinuities are impossible in a logical world and are contrary to an enormous amount of Doppler data which would certainly reveal those discontinuities if they existed. The discontinuities disappear if we return to Doppler?s original [1842] equations which were based on presence of an ?aether?. Unfortunately, Doppler was counseled to drop his longitudinal light wave views soon after 1842 and the discontinuities without an ether have remained unseen since then. Texts, c.f., Hansch, do use Doppler?s 1842 light equations for sound waves in air but shift to relativity?s equations for optical Doppler which ignore the light wave discontinuities. Attempts by Ritz are discussed but do not eliminate discontinuities in all conditions. If confirmed by additional experiments, this finding is yet another reason to reject relativity?s concepts and should be of interest in electrodynamics and astronomy. One such use might be to help explain the excess redshift occasionally seen in astronomy. When coupled with the refutation of relativity?s presumed limits of speed to c , as discussed in a companion paper, light waves from a superluminal light emitter would arrive at an observer at constant c but in reverse order with seemingly increased wavelengths.This paper is aka “Doppler?s 1842 Aetherbased Concepts Provide the Only Known Solution to the TwoFrame Light Travel Problem, and Possibly Other Concerns in Astronomy” 
Mathematical Invalidity of the Lorentz Transformation in Relativity Theory 
Aleksandar Vukelja 
MichelsonMorley Result Proves Special Relativity Wrong 
Peter Marquardt, Paul Wesley 
The Natural Philosophy Alliance (NPA) sponsors regular international conferences for presenting highquality papers discussing aspects of philosophy in the sciences.
Many papers offer challenges to accepted orthodoxy in the sciences, especially in physics. Everything from the microphysics of quantum mechanics to the macrophysics of cosmology is entertained.
Though the main interest of the NPA is in challenging orthodoxy in the sciences, it will also feature papers defending such orthodoxy. Our ultimate purpose is to enable participants to articulate their own understanding of the truth.
All papers are reviewed by society officers, and sometimes by other members, before presentation in conferences, and they are edited, sometimes very significantly, prior to publication in the Proceedings of the NPA.
NPA is, in turn, the only component of the nonprofit corporation: The Natural Philosophy Foundation, Inc., (NPF). The NPF was incorporated in the State of Maryland on July 17, 1995 with the intent to become a longterm science fostering charity organization

New Model for a Spherical ‘Big Bang’ 
Roger A. Rydin 
A new model is postulated for the formation of the Universe based upon deeppencilsurvey experimental data, which indicates that galaxies in the Universe are moving radially in a spherical sense from an origin in the Virgo Cluster rather than being carried along in space that is expanding uniformly in a centerless sense. The Cosmic Microwave Background is centered in Virgo, the only known blueshift galaxies are in the direction of Virgo, and a unique starless galaxy of hydrogen has just been discovered there. All these observations are consistent with the new model. 
Observation of Ether Drift in Experiments with Geostationary Satellites 
Eugene I. Shtyrkov 
The ether drift due to motion of the Earth has been discovered in the process of tracking of a geostationary satellite. The average annual velocity of the orbital component of the ether drift found to be 29.4 km/s that almost coincides with the known value of orbital velocity of the Earth (29.765 km/s). Parameters of galactic motion of the solar system have also been measured and obtained values are 270^{0} for apex right ascension (in astronomic literature269.983^{0}), 89.6^{0} for apex declination (Dec=51.30^{0} in astronomy) and 600 km/s for velocity of Sun?s system. Such results are direct evidence of fact that velocity of the uniformly moving system can be measured with a device in which the source of radiation (geostationary satellite) and detector (antenna of the telescope) are fixed with respect to each other and the system itself. Evidently, this can be considered as a final refutation of the special relativity theory. 
Oersted’s Experiment on a Balance 
Francisco J. Müller 
Two rarelyasked questions about Oersted’s epochmaking experiment of 1820 are formulated: are there any forces acting on the magnetized needle after it has attained its stable perpendicular direction with respect to the currentbearing wire? If so, do they comply with Newton’s Third Law? Einstein’s view of 1918 strongly affirmed a departure of Oersted’s experiment from Newtonian mechanics. A repetition of the experiment, however, performed on an electronic balance, indicates positive answers to the stated questions. Application of Ampere’s original theory of 1825, and of conventional electromagnetic theory of the present, both agree with the performed experiment and not with Einstein’s misinterpretation of Oersted’s original experiment. 
On Electrodynamic Forces 
Jaroslav G. Klyushin 
Historically, electrodynamics began when Gauss and Weber generalized Coulomb law for the case of moving charges. In the framework of this approach interaction force between two charges depends on their velocities difference, i.e. on their relative movement. Some authors (for instance [1]) show that this approach has not been exhausted yet. Spencer and her colleagues [2] have generalized this approach and shown that some experiments that cannot be explained within the framework of presentday electrodynamics may be naturally explained in terms of relative movement. These and other papers began a rebirth period for GaussWeber ideas. In particular Bernstein [3] shows that Weber?s formula has already covered all ?relativistic? effects. Historically, the GaussWeber approach was eclipsed by the field Maxwell approach, and forgotten by the end of 19th century. For instance, Einstein apparently didn?t know Weber?s papers. At any rate, he never mentioned Gauss and Weber, although the resemblance between the consequences of the two theories is surprising. Maxwell theory investigates the problem, not of charges interaction, but of the ?field? created by a moving charge in the surrounding space. In order to come to interaction force, an additional postulate is introduced. It is usually called Lorentz force formula. This formula describes interaction of the fields created by a moving charge with another charge called ?test charge?. This test charge is supposed not to create fields of its own but external fields created by the first charge are supposed to directly act on this test charge. Although Lorentz force formula predicts results of many experiments its effect in today form looks completely unsatisfactory. Many authors (for instance [2]) shows that Lorentz force formula isn?t able to explain a lot of experimental facts. Lorentz force asymmetry also leads to many theoretical and aesthetic problems. If it is considered exhaustive we come to contradiction to the third Newtonian law: it allows situations when one charge acts on the other and this other doesn?t act on the first one. In addition if we don?t accept either concept, then the very idea of ?absolute velocity? which appears in Lorentz force formula turns to be suspended. Actually dissatisfaction with this side of the formula stimulated Einstein with his Relativity Theory. In other terms Lorentz force formula in its presentday form is asymmetric and not universal. Ampere [4] and Whittaker [5] proposed formulas of their own to describe charge interaction force. They did this in terms of ?differential currents?. When paraphrased in terms of moving charges these formulas could expand and symmetries Lorentz force formula. But their ?field sense?, i.e., their connection with Maxwell equations, was not clear until recently. This paper?s author proposed certain generalization as Maxwell equation as Lorentz force formula [6], [7]. The generalized formula implies Lorentz, Ampere, Whittaker, Weber and Spenser formulas. It also includes some additional items not known previously. For instance it predicts cluster effect, BohmAharonov effect and electroweak interaction. The Weber formula has the same invalidity as the Lorentz one: it is asymmetric and not universal. The generalized formula includes items which make Weber formula symmetric and coordinate it to the whole set of experiments. The generalized formula for charge interaction is naturally modernized to describe photons interaction [8]. And this explains some quantum paradoxes.ReferencesAndre K.T. Assis, Relational Mechanics (Apeiron, Montreal, 1999). D.E. Spencer, G. Coutu, W.W. Bowley, U.Y. Shama, P.J. Mann, “The Experimental Verification of the New Gaussian Equation for the Force between Moving Charges: Overhead Welding”, International Conference on Space, Time and Motion., September 2329, 1996, St. Petersburg, Russia. V.M. Bernstein, ” Electrodynamics and Gravitation Based on Trends Preceeding Maxwell and Einstein”, Galilean Electrodynamics 11, (5) 91 (2000). A.M. Ampere, Theorie mathematique des phenomenes electrodynamiques uniquement deduite de l?experience (Blanchard, Paris, 1958). E.T. Whittaker, A History of the Theories of Aether & Electricity, p 91 (Longman, Green and Co, London, 1910). J.G. Klyushin, ” A Field Generation for the Lorentz Force Formula”, Galilean Electrodynamics 11, (5), 83 (200). J.G. Klyushin, ” Generalised Electrodynamics and Lorentz Force Formula”, NPA conference proceeding, Storrs, Connecticut, 2003. J.G. Klyushin, ” Wave Solution and Quantum Mechanics – Part 1″, Galilean Electrodynamics 15, Special Issues 2, GED ? East, Fall (2004). 
On Electron Movement in Ether 
Jaroslav G. Klyushin 
Theories of electro and gravidynamics were proposed in [1], [2], and [3] yield that electric charge q moving with speed V is acted by force of ether resistance qV . This is an essential difference between electrically charged and electrically neutral body movement. In accord with well known Newton ether law doesn?t resist steady movement of electrically neutral body. Such resistance appears only when the body is accelerated. It is also well known that an external energy is necessary in order to sustain steady electric current. It is believed nowadays that this is because electrons in their movement collide with conductor?s atoms. But this is also necessary for charge movement in free ether. In other terms electron movement in free ether resembles rather car movement on a road then puck movement on ice. Electron moving with constant speed V is actually a neutral mass m moving with acceleration (omega)V, where (omega) is equatorial rotation angular velocity of the torus defining electron [3]. This problem is thoroughly investigated in [4]. Formulas describing electron movement under different conditions with subluminal and superluminal speed are found in [4]. In particular it is shown that electron must move with double local light velocity to achieve superconductivity. When matter temperature is lessened local light velocity in it is also lessened. And this enables electron moving with ordinary velocity to overcome superconductivity barrier. It is shown in [5] that hydrodynamic effect of “additional mass” actually takes place in well known Kaufmann?s experiment now interpreted as ?relativistic effect?. This result takes place in full accord with above mentioned peculiarity of electron movement and generalized formula far Lorentz force [2]. References

On Gravidynamic Forces 
Jaroslav G. Klyushin 
Papers [1] and [2] proposed to describe a gravidynamic field with the help of Maxwell type equations in which first time derivative is changed with the second one. Such a field is characterized by a certain constant that has dimension of acceleration. This characterizes a gravidynamic field just in the same sense as light velocity characterizes an electrodynamic field. One can say that electricity is the field of velocities and gravity is the field of accelerations. In order to describe interaction of two gravidynamic fields, a formula can be proposed similar to generalized formula for electrodynamic fields proposed in [3]. This formula shows that two masses interaction depends, not only on distance, but on accelerations and third and forth time derivatives in general. This is also similar to electric charge interaction, which depends on velocities and accelerations. In a static case, this formula naturally comes to Newton?s gravity law. The dynamic version of gravitational interaction predicts planets perihelion displacement, gravitational ?red shift?, differential rotation of the Sun and gasoliquid planets, an additional force in galaxies which today is interpreted as ?dark mass?. On the Earth, this formula predicts continental drift, explains the observed character of oceanic and atmospheric currents, changes in the velocity of Earth rotation and some other effects. In the framework of this approach, a model of the electron as a massive torus is proposed. The mass drawing this torus performs two curling movement: in equatorial and meridional planes of the torus. Equatorial rotation defines charge and meridional rotation defines electron spin. Experiment shows that the force of electric repulsion of two electrons is 4.17 x 10^{42} times bigger than the force of their gravitational attraction. This helps to find angular velocity of electron equatorial rotation. It is 8.145 x 10^{20} rad/s. It coincides with DeBroglie frequency of electron in rest and radius of the greater circumference defining torus coincides with its Compton Wave length. If (omega) is the angular velocity of the electron equatorial rotation, then (…equation…) (1); Electron charge (…equation…)kg/c (2) Here m is electron mass also gained from electrodynamic reasoning and coinciding with the experimental value. Charge sign is defined by the screw which angular velocity of equatorial rotation constitutes with angular velocity of meridional rotation: it is right or left. If correlation (2) is established one can express all electrodynamic quantities in mechanical terms [4]. In particular dielectric constant has dimension of mass density and magnetic constant has dimension of compressibility of a certain medium that fills the space. Physical text books usually call it “physical vacuum”. The author does not use this term because of its logic and aesthetic ugliness and prefers term “ether”. Any “a priori” qualities are not prescribed to this term except those that are consequences of the experiments and proposed theories. In particular this means that light velocity in free ether is just speed of the sound in it and (…equation…) (3). References

On Light 
Gin Conesa 
In this article I modestly propose what might be considered a step forward, along the road opened up by Fresnel and Einstein, toward a greater understanding of the nature of light. By taking into account the Magnetosphere, the electromagnetic space that surrounds us, I intend to demonstrate that it is possible to explain past experiments carried out with light with certain properties of waves and the relativity equations of Galileo. 
On Lorentz Transformation 
Diego Jos? Arturo Sa 
The invalidity of the finite Lorentz transformation is suggested. A frequent error, preserved since the original works of Lorentz, Minkowski and Einstein, is that the Lorentz transformations are written as if they referred to finite magnitudes, when in fact they should refer to infinitesimals. To this error can be traced most of the paradoxes that pervade Special Relativity. 
On the Ramifications of the Schwarzschild SpaceTime Metric 
Stephen J. Crothers 
In a previous paper I derived the general solution for the simple pointmass in a true Schwarzschild space. I extend that solution to the pointcharge, the rotating pointmass, and the rotating pointcharge, culminating in a single expression for the general solution for the pointmass in all its configurations when ? = 0. The general exact solution is proved regular everywhere except at the arbitrary location of the source of the gravitational field. In no case does the black hole manifest. The conventional solutions giving rise to various black holes are shown to be inconsistent with General Relativity. 
On This, Till Now, So Shy Universal Ether 
Dan Romalo 
Hypothetically assuming that there exists a physical ether, extended in the entire existing space, and that it is continuously absorbed by dense matter in a way generating a locally welldetermined flow field, some possibly observable consequences are investigated theoretically. In a first step, the consequences of that assumption on the orbital movement of Mercury are evaluated, the conclusion being that, without contradicting any known fact, it may only in a very small proportion participate as an explanation. In a second step, the bending of lightrays emitted on distant stars and passing, to reach us, near massive celestial bodies is evaluated by means of an Excel program. The figures so obtained are near enough to those deduced from astronomical observations. The program describes also the temporal evolution of the bended rays when they pass very near an occulting massive body. Suggestions are offered for some experimental – by means of a spatial telescope – astronomical observations of the phenomenon 
Origins of Universal Systems: A Change in Direction of Scientific Thought 
Alexander A. Scarborough 
The Big Bang (BB) hypothesis, initiated in 1948, lacks substantiated evidence to the extent of being called conjectural, a myth, and even a costly fraud — yet it survives for lack of a viable alternative. To paraphrase Thomas Kuhn: before there can be any scientific revolution, there must be a reasonable concept to replace prevailing beliefs. The Little Bangs (LB)/FLINE model of universal origins is a viable alternative that meets Kuhn?s prerequisite for a valid scientific revolution, and offers a definitive change in direction of scientific thought. The new model offers valid solutions to many mysteries that remain insolvable in the BB model of universal origins. It needs neither dark energy nor dark matter to explain these mysteries. Nor does it need the BB?s cosmological constant to explain the rapid expansion of our Universe, nor gravitons to explain gravity. Along with these explanations, the model explains the universal 2.7 K radiation as a product of the ongoing nucleosynthesis in stars and active planets in all galaxies; such radiation is steady, but relatively shortlived, and must have a constant source to produce it continuously. 
Physical Analysis 
Peter Marquardt 
The historical struggles between the geocentric and the final winner, the heliocentric model, (should) have taught us that neither pure observation nor pure mathematics suffice to provide a physically tenable model. The allimportant ingredient in truly successful modeling is physical analysis. It helps to discard defective theories in spite of some of their numerical pseudosuccesses (albeit confirmed by experiment like E = mc^{2}; de Broglie’s (lambda), Planck’s (hbar) that are owed to mathematical indifference against replacement errors rather than to physical intuition. A critical view discloses that these successes by no means prove the theories that became famous for them. Physical analysis should and can do still more as exemplified by accounting for both kinds of results of the MM experiment. Physical analysis does not strive for grand unification, explanation, understanding, nor does it call upon common sense. Based on uniqueness, causality, and consistency it simply intends to be the proper language of physics, clarifying basic definitions, respecting dimensions, trying to solve simple important tasks, keeping track of approximations, and distinguishing the event from the impression of observers who often are victims of their own gedanken experiments. The latter usually neglect the dynamic context and hence fail to handle energy, force, etc. correctly. 
Physics Owes Max Planck an Apology 
Evert Jan Post 
No abstract provided 
Quantum Gravity and the Structure of the Electron 
Robert J. Heaston 
The special issue of Scientific American for September 2004 on ?Beyond Einstein? can be summarized in four words: ?Physics needs new theories.? Eleven times, the request was for a theory of quantum gravity/relativity. It would appear from a review of the literature that what is desired is some collaboration between Planck?s quantum and gravity/relativity. Much of the work has been at the Planck scale where the quantum may be associated with the Einstein field equations of general relativity. However, Hawking and Penrose suggest that quantum gravity may also occur at the curvature of the electron. An interesting coupling does occur if it is assumed that an electron has a surface that spins constantly at the speed of light. In this case, it is hypothesized that quantum gravity is defined by the quantized relativistic changes in massenergy during translation that vary in lockstep with quantized spin compensation to keep the angular velocity of an electron constant at the speed of light. Several pieces of information are brought together to support this hypothesis. 
Radiation, Quantization, & Temperature 
Bert Schreiber 
Originally presented as three separate papers: 1. Time 2. Physical Constants Quantized 3. Temperature 
Relativistic Gravitational Effects of the Central Mass Object on Orbiting Systems around that Central Mass Object 
Roland L. Hron 
Clocks in the vicinity of earth as observed by GPS (Global Positioning System), do not seem to vary with their distance from the sun. This phenomenon has been described as the “noonmidnight” problem and was discussed by Hatch (2004). Clocks on the earth or in orbit around the earth are closer to the sun at noon than at midnight, however, the difference in gravitational potential from the sun does not result in different clock rates. The relativistic gravitational forces in the throughout (???) the near earth system are very nearly the same as at the orbital radius. This paper is a detailed analysis which shows that the observations are a result of relativistic equivalence and that the change in distance effects are nearly canceled by the corresponding change in orbital velocity. Previous authors have suggested that the solution to the problem is the equivalence principle but, to my knowledge, no thorough mathematical analysis has been presented. 
Speculations About Electromagnetism 
Lee Shimmin 
How often it is that we look for complicated explanations for physical phenomena when simpler explanations are generally overlooked. In this paper I will review some wellknown features of charged particles and electric fields from a fresh point of view. I shall draw upon a letter from Michael Faraday to his friend, Richard Phillips, written in April of 1846. I will review what we have been taught about electric fields and how Faraday thought about them, keeping what appears useful and ignoring the rest. I will begin to construct a somewhat different theory of electromagnetism, making clear distinctions between the current paradigm and what is being proposed here 
SRT?s ?Rosetta Stone? 
Cynthia K. Whitney 
The history of mathematical physics has seen its Newtonian era, with its Euclidean concept of Space, its Universal Time, and its Galilean Velocity, and then its Einsteinian era, with its relativistic concepts of spacetime and velocity. The presentday understanding is that these two eras represent two different and incommensurable worldviews; that the Einsteinian worldview can completely replace the Newtonain worldview, because the Newtonian worldview is at best a limiting approximation to the ?correct? Einsteinian worldview. By contrast, the present author believes that the two worldviews are exactly that: two views of one reality, expressed in two different mathematical languages. But once a ?multilingual dictionary?, a ?Rosetta Stone?, is provided, the two different worldviews can produce the same mental understanding. The key ingredient for such a ?Rosetta Stone? is a third worldview. One possible basis for such a third worldview is a revised postulate about the way in which light propagates. This author presented one such postulate to this audience at our last conference, and the present paper gives the resulting ?Rosetta Stone?. Once the ?Rosetta Stone? is in hand, all the worldviews can produce the same, though new, mental understanding. This new mental understanding can be reexpressed in natural (verbal) language that is more nuanced and precise, less paradoxridden and confusing, than was heretofore imagined. 
Statistical Topology of Brain Nuclei to Understand Tourette Syndrome Tics 
James Winslow 
Understanding Tourette Syndrome tics is a Rosetta Stone for decoding how complex behavior is produced by the human brain. Single neurons and synapses are well understood and conveniently simulated. The inclusion of synapses are well understood and conveniently simulated. The inclusion of synaptic NMD receptor scaling and several levels of brain structure to model behavior is an interesting mathematical and computational question. A statistical and stochastic topological model is presented for large scale simulation of many brain nuclei with many neuron types per nuclei with intra and extra nuclei connections. This is an important step in development of a model which is almost everywhere biologically correct and sufficient for hypothesis testing and insight to clinical treatment. 
Structure Formation in the Early BigBang Universe? Deep & Ultra Deep Fields Say No! 
Billie Westergard 
The decoupling of matter from radiation occurred about 380 million years after the start of the Big Bang at a temperature of about 3500 degrees K. At some time after the decoupling of matter from radiation, the Big Bang consisted of a hot, expanding, homogeneous, and isotropic volume of space containing only Hydrogen and Helium, with no dust. Nothing. No stars, no black holes, no galaxies, nothing, except Hydrogen and Helium. In such an environment there is absolutely no way to initiate gravitational collapse of the gas to form structures. However, the Hubble Deep Field photographs show galaxies and clusters of galaxies that have already formed just 400 million years after decoupling. Now we have the Hubble Ultra Deep Field photographs that show galaxies and clusters of galaxies that are already formed just 200 million years after decoupling and it is thought that the actual formation took place about 100 million years after decoupling. What logical conclusion can be derived from the Hubble Deep Fields?
This paper is aka “Structure Formation in the Early Universe and the Hubble Deep Fields”. 
Technology for the Reduction of Atmospheric Pollution 
Hal Fox 
Much of the atmospheric pollution (CO_{2} and nitrous oxides) results from the burning of fossil fuels. The world?s worst case of atmospheric pollution is from the United States due to the millions of automobiles and trucks burning gasoline and diesel fuel. Some attempt is being made to reduce atmospheric pollution by the use of hybrid vehicles using small engines to charge batteries. This approach is being highly favored by many buyers. A better approach is to use the vast energy of space to provide electrical energy for the operation of a variety of types of vehicles from lawn mowers to highway trucks. Efforts to measure the available energy from space is presented with citations of some of the patents that have issued (e.g. U.S. Patent 5,018,180). Laboratory work for the development of devices and systems for tapping into the vast energy of space is presented with operational data. The problems of commercializing this type of newenergy sources are presented. Part of the problem lies in lack of understanding of the magnitude of space energy. (Example: there is enough energy in a oneliter volume to boil the Atlantic Ocean, if the energy could be converted to thermal energy.) The longterm advantages and expectations of the use of this newenergy technology are discussed. References and Laboratory data are presented. It is important to realize that this type of newenergy technology (together with similar technologies) is expected to result in a trilliondollarperyear business within the next ten years. The fossil fuels should be reserved to use as chemical feedstocks. 
Temperature 
Bert Schreiber 
Exactly what is meant by the word ?temperature? is subject to human interpretation. This paper will attempt to clarify its meaning and how it is defined etc. in physical terms. A brief history is included. This discourse requires the discoveries of the author who quantized the physical constants and defined and derived their numerical values. [1] It would be a waste of time to use the current SI values of the physical constants, and then have to do it all over again. When the readers reach the end, then they should understand why the author did not use current theory and beliefs. However, if any care to use the current SI values, you will get the identical physical end results that are herein, although they are very upsetting. A table showing the current and new values of the fundamental physical constants is at the end of this paper, and a proof of same. 
The Achilles Heel of Kinematic Theories 
Peter Marquardt, Georg Galeczki 
No serious dynamic theory in physics can do without interactions, the trademark of event relativities as contrasted to kinematic models. While fundamental force laws (Newton, Coulomb) have been successfully formulated in terms of simple onebody potentials, dynamics calls for the more elaborate timedependent potentials as pioneered by Weber for the case of two charges in relative motion. Local dynamic environments, changing incessantly in Nature?s real scenarios, are conveniently rendered in terms of generalized potentials which provide the relevant information on forces acting under changing conditions in agreement with Newton?s ActionReaction Principle. Improper treatment or total neglect of potential energy in ?special relativity? and Copenhagen quantum theory discloses the weakness of these observercentered theories. Important concepts (e.g. an upper speed limit, action, wave propagation, energy – a late arrival in physics, etc.) require absolute space, universal time, and a proper dynamic system of reference. The infinite and eternal Universe with its ubiquitous background potential defines the oneandonly legitimate dynamic inertial system where all of Nature?s laws hold without any of the severe restrictions artificially imposed by gedanken experiments and mathematical constructs. 
The Aether and its Effects 
James B. Wright 
In the Philosophy of Objectivism, Ayn Rand’s point of beginning is the recognition of ?Existence?, per se, as axiomatic, upon which she builds her entire philosophy. In Physics we need a similar axiomatic concept, a point of beginning upon which the whole structure of physics may be built. Again, Existence is that concept, however we cannot leave it at that. Existence needs to be defined. This necessitates an Existence that is literally infinite and eternal, of which our Observable Universe is but a tiny sample. Tiny though it may be, it’s all we have; however, it appears that it is adequate to give us a clue as to the nature of Existence. Two basic problems need addressing:
These problems are the subject of this paper. The aether is seen herein as a necessary part of existence, not in the sense of an intellectual or emotional need but as an existent, every much so and as fundamental as are the electrons and protons and neutrons that we are familiar with. It is identified as the energymass that comes from the stars of the galaxies as they burn, one of the two basic components of our Universe, the other being its materialmass. Evidence of this aether is found in the work of Vera Rubin, specifically in her ?Dark Matter? which envelops the spiral galaxies that she studied. From this the characteristics of the aether are determined, among which are the permittivity and the permeability of the ?vacuum? of space. A solution to the Cosmological Redshift, without the need for an Expanding Universe, is found, as is a mechanism for the development of the gravitational force utilizing only characteristics to be found in our ?Electrical Universe?. The BiefeldBrown Effect is seen to be plausible and therefore probable. The paper ends with an Addendum that quantifies the components of the Cosmic Cycle required to sustain our Universe as it appears to be after an eternity of existence. 
The Cosmic Microwave Background: A New Perspective on the 2.7 K Radiation 
Alexander A. Scarborough 
Three observations provide the fundamental basis for the standard cosmology featuring the Big Bang (BB) concept of universal origins: 1) The observed expansion of the Universe (usually interpreted in the framework of relativity as an expansion of the metric of space); 2) The 2.7 K cosmic background radiation (CBR), interpreted as a remnant of the BB; 3) The apparently successful explanation of the relative abundance of the light elements. Oddly, the same three observations serve even better as the fundamental basis for a different concept: the Little Bangs (LB)/FLINE model of universal origins that intermeshes precisely with the Four Laws of Planetary Motion and the 5stage evolution of planets and moons via internal nucleosynthesis that drives all universal evolution. Recent evidence of galaxies so distant that light now arriving at telescopes reflects conditions of the galaxies at least 12.7 billion years ago: stars were appearing “at a prodigious rate” – as predicted by the LB concept. Conversely, the BB provides little, if any, substantiated method for continuous or evolutionary functions of universal systems. This paper concentrates on the 2.7 K CBR, providing strong evidence against the concept of radiation existing as a leftover remnant of the BB. Substantiated evidence reveals the powerful and intimate connection between the 2.7 K CBR and the LB/FLINE model of universal origins. Microwave radiation is relatively shortlived, and must have a constant source to produce it continuously. 
The Deconstruction of Einstein, and the Reconstruction of Human Intelligence in Physics and Elsewhere 
Francisco J. Müller 
A centenary compilation of comments about Einstein?s work clearly shows that an Einsteinian cultural bias has pervaded twentiethcentury thinking. The enumeration includes sources not only from Einstein?s critics, but from admirers and followers as well. The topics include among others: Einstein?s ?proof? of Lorentz?s equations; Einstein?s ?proof? of E=mc^{2} ; Einstein?s disregard of tidal forces in his equivalence principle; Einstein?s wrong ideas regarding cosmology; the fame that was engineered for Einstein by Eddington with the eclipse of 1919; the enmity that Einstein expressed for quantum physics, a monster the he had helped to create. Einstein?s talent was to use ideas of others, add something of his own, and thereby create a mixture that careful study reveals to make no sense at all. On the positive side, this paper tackles the much more difficult task of reconstructing human intelligence after the Einstein fad has destroyed it. But some starting points are indicated as hope for the future. 
The Detection of Absolute Motion: From 18872005 
Reginald T. Cahill 
Physics textbooks assert that in the famous 1887 interferometer experiment to detect absolute motion Michelson and Morley saw no rotationinduced fringe shifts; it was a null experiment. However this is incorrect. Their published data revealed to them the expected fringe shifts, but that data gave a speed of some 8km/s using a Newtonian theory for the operation of the interferometer, and so was rejected by them solely because it was less than the 30km/s orbital speed of the earth. A 2002 post relativisticeffects analysis for the operation of this device however gives a speed > 300km/s. So this experiment detected both absolute motion and the breakdown of Newtonian physics. So far another six experiments, four using a Michelson interferometer in gasmode and two coaxial cable 1st order v/c experiments, have confirmed this first detection of absolute motion in 1887. These experiments imply that the 1905 Einstein postulate for the observerinvariance of the speed of light is invalid, and that the spacetime ontology is experimentally falsified. A new first order experiment is being constructed here in 2005 to measure with greater accuracy not only the velocity of absolute motion, but also to study the wave phenomena already seen in earlier experiments. 
The Failure of E = mc2 
Peter Graneau 
The 2005 John Edgar Chappell Memorial Lecture of the Natural Philosophy Alliance. Over the course of some years I had many long and intense telephone conversations with John Chappell. We were in full agreement with regard to the unsatisfactory status of the teaching of physics. Our arguments concerned what the Natural Philosophy Alliance should do to try and remedy the situation. John felt our primary purpose was to reveal to the profession and the general public what is wrong with Einstein?s relativity theories. My view has been – and still is – that science would be better served if we proposed and discussed alternative physics paradigms. To honor Chappell?s wish in this lecture I will comply with it and criticize relativity theory. 
The Fallacy of the Light Clock Experiment 
Byoung Ha Ahn 
Even if an object is in uniform rectilinear motion, the relative speed of the object with respect to a stationary observer who is off the line of motion of the object is not constant. (The term ‘line of motion’ means an imaginary straight line along which an object moves.) In this case, the speed of the object with respect to the observer changes continuously as the object moves on. A noteworthy fact in this case is that the speed of the object with respect to the observer becomes zero at the moment the angle made by the object becomes 90 degrees. This is so regardless of the proper speed of the object (in its line of motion) or the distance of the observer from the line of motion of the object. These and other related discoveries discussed in this paper reveal that special relativity was born from the ignorance of the relative character of speed or motion.
This paper is aka “The Speed of an Object with Respect to an Observer Who is Off the Line of Motion of the Object”. 
The Generated Ether 
JohnErik Persson 
Many words have been written about MichelsonMorley’s measurements as they have been thought to open the way for special relativity. However, a wrong interpretation of starlight aberration is the real opener for Einstein’s theory. A new interpretation demonstrating unification with Stoke’s entrained ether is given here. It is also explained why gravity has no aberration. The experiencies from the Global Positioning System demonstate a Sagnac effect caused by the receiver’s motion in relation to the center of the Earth. This implies an ether dependent of the Earth’ translation but not on its rotation. Therefore, we have an etherwind about a hundred times sMüller than Michelson’s. This is in agreement with fiberoptic measurements made by R. Wang. 
The Gravitational Energy Formula is Wrong 
Daniel Zimmer 
The formula for gravitational potential energy is GPE=GMm/r. The gravitational potential energy of a onekilogram body on the surface of the Earth is negative 62,501,800 joules. The gravitational potential energy of a onekilogram body at a height of ten meters is negative 62,501,700 joules. Minus 62,501,700 is a less negative number than minus 62,501,800, so raising a body to a height causes its gravitational potential energy to go up. As a body falls to the ground, kinetic energy goes up, gravitational potential energy goes down, and energy is conserved. So far, so good. The gravitational potential energy of a twokilogram body on the surface of the Earth is negative 125,003,600 joules. Minus 62,501,800 is a less negative number than minus 125,003,600, so a onekilogram body has more gravitational potential energy than a two kilogram body. False! The gravitational potential energy formula is obviously wrong. You can read my paper My Gravity Theory Is Better Than Your Gravity Theory on my web page http://www.danielzimmer.com/ 
The Gravitational Explanation of the Seasonal Variations in Chemical Processes Observed by Roberto and Emilio Monti 
Domina Eberle Spencer, Terri L. Mascardo, Uma Y. Shama, Philip J. Mann 
The remarkable Monti experiments show that some chemical reactions occur in spring and fall but not in summer or winter. In this paper it is proposed that Newton?s law of gravity be modified by the addition of a force term that varies with the seasons. Investigation of the equations of planetary motion shows that certain functions of the derivative of the radius with respect to angle have such a seasonal variation. The proposed modification of Newton?s law of gravity is compared with the modifications previously proposed by Assis and by Kluyshin. 
The Solution to the Mystery of the Square Root of Minus One 
Peter F. Erickson 
This is an excerpt from a forthcoming book on the nature of the infinitesimal. This square root of negative one has been in use for centuries. Most consider it to be either something transcendental or a mere direction to perform a certain operation. Einstein used it to help make plausible his idea of the fourth dimension. Actually, neither the idealists nor the logical positivists are correct. The 1 inside the radical sign is from a number system discovered by the author. It is called the “Veritable Number System.” It?s special properties are shown herein. It stands with the real number system and absolute numbers as one of the three ways to handle the concept of direction. The author has found some applications to physical science not discussed in this paper. Students of nature and others are welcome to explore the implications of what has been disclosed, and use it to increase man?s knowledge of reality. 
The Spinning Charged Ring 
Domina Eberle Spencer, Uma Y. Shama, Terri Mascardo, Philip J. Mann 
The gravitational and electromagnetic forces on the spinning charged ring are analyzed in the following two ways:
Conclusions are drawn on the possible existence of a spinning charged ring, from the point of view of classical physics, and from the point of view of the most recent formulation of gravitational and electromagnetic theory. 
The Top 50 Problems with the Big Bang 
Tom Van Flandern 
The Big Bang theory has never achieved a true prediction success in a situation where the theory was placed at risk of falsification before the results were known. It is instead a series of accommodations of existing observations aided by a variety of ad hoc helper hypotheses, the best known of which are ?dark matter? and ?dark energy?. A decade ago, a list of the top 10 problems with the theory seemed to encapsulate the situation. Since then, the list has had to be expanded twice. It should now be evident to objective minds that nothing about the Universe interpreted with the Big Bang theory is necessarily right, not even the most basic idea in it; namely, that the Universe is expanding. There are four major and many more minor replacement models that should be seriously considered. To get this message to the astronomical community, we are looking for additional authors and their associated institutions to put out a joint communiqu? in a major journal summarizing these points. 
Time 
Bert Schreiber 
The problem of determining what ?time? is has occupied the best minds since antiquity. It all boiled down to per Pythagoras: Is time and/or length bits (finite) of time/length (granular now called a quantum) or continuous? Unfortunately, the later scientists had a 5050 chance and chose the wrong one, or continuous. This then resulted in that the current fundamental physical constants were or could be infinitely small to infinitely large. All past and current theories prohibit any quantization of the constants, as that would completely destroy them 100%. Not only that, the current dimensionless point and pi geometry could no longer be used. Therefore, the current establishment suppresses any heresy that the fundamental constants can be and are a quantum for starters. The current establishment?s concept of time is the interval between two events, or the measurement, clock time or elapsed time. 
Time Standards and Particle Interactions in a Fractal Universe, with Remarks on Gravity 
Harry A. Schmitz 
A fractal particle is a threedimensional, standingwave pattern. This paper examines how fractal particles can become shorter in wavelength ? and vibrate faster ? with the passage of time. ?Absolute? time is defined independently of particles, and hence is unchanging. ?Relative? time is based on the period of oscillation of fractal particles; it changes relative to the age of a fractal universe. In this paper, a simple, elegant equation is derived to correlate these two time standards, and calculate the age of our universe. I show here how particle interactions are possible: the standing wave around a source particle interacts with the maximum energy density at the core of a test particle, resulting in a redirection of energy, i.e., a force. For a test particle starting at rest, this electrostatic force increases the kinetic energy of the test particle. Repulsion between likeparticles and attraction between unalikeparticles is explained by the cylindrical or spherical symmetries of fractal particles. Gravitational attraction occurs because, as particle wavelengths become shorter with time, a portion of the energy stored around the test particle gradually is released in a way that causes an attractive force. 
Time, and Time Again! 
Al F. Kracklauer 
If a physics theory is good, beautiful, correct, etc., then it would seem reasonable to expect that it would offer a good, beautiful and correct solution to the simplest of all conceivable nontrivial physics problems. Maxwell field theory does not satisfy this desideratum! The simplest of all physics problems surely is the description of a ?toy? universe comprising one particle. This problem is, of course, trivial and boring; the particle just sits there. The next simplest problem, a toy universe of two, classical, charged particles, is both nontrivial and unsolved! There are, however, approximation techniques, so that practical problems can be mastered. Basically, they take it that one of the particles is a current, solve Maxwell?s equations at the location of the other, apply Lorentz?s force law to get the second particle?s motion. Then it in turn is taken as a current, its EM fields are calculated at the position of the first, where then Lorentz?s force law gives a perturbationcorrection. This is then continued back and forth until an approximation of the desired accuracy is obtained. But, to date, there is no widelyaccepted closed formulation for the dynamics of such a toy universe. One central reason, it is asserted, is that there is no universal, absolute time able to serve as the variable conjugate to the Hamiltonian of the total system. A didactic example of this matter is well known as the ?twin paradox?. Now, this writer regards this situation as symptomatic of serious misunderstanding. If there were, in fact, no system time, then there would also be no system Hamiltonian, which in turns would mean that there would be no global conservation of energy and momentum for this toy system. But, as there are only two particles in the system, there is nowhere for energy or momentum to go; no absorbers exterior to the system, etc., so on and so forth. Energy and momentum just have to be conserved, and a formulation of dynamics taking these realities selfconsistently into account must be possible. If `Nature? can do it, so can some mathematics! This matter has occupied this writer for a number of decades now, and a certain amount of potential progress has been made. In addition, at least two other ancillary issues with regard to `time? have been injecting mysticism into modern physics theories suspiciously. These include the notions of ?advanced interaction? and ?nonlocality?. The paper, submitted also to Galilean Electrodynamics, surveys this writer?s proposed remedies for these problematic features. 
Unification Based on Astronomical Quantization and Earth Expansion 
Martin Kokus 
Certain controversial phenomena and nonstandard theories may unify into a more coherent unified theory of natural phenomena than the current accepted paradigms. If the quantization of astronomical red shift, masses and angular momentum as well as a secular increase in earth radius which is too great to be explained by standard physics are accepted as real; then the quest for unification is greatly simplified. All of the standard approaches are eliminated. The author will discuss his and others attempts to seek common ground between the two heresies. The discussion will include Barut?s leptonic theory of matter and spherical rotation. The author is keenly interested is others suggestions for resolving these paradoxes, especially the creation of matter without the parallel creation of antimatter that both phenomena seem to require. Please consider the above presentation for evaluation by the NPA community. Since I presented the precursor at Storrs in 2000, I have received more positive feedback on it than anything else that I?ve done. 
Unification of Physics 
Ken H. Seto 
<p>A new model of our Universe, called Model Mechanics (MM), has been formulated. Model Mechanics provides solutions to the following problematic cosmological observations:</p><ol> <li>It was discovered in 1998 that far reached regions of the Universe are in a state of accelerated expansion. This discovery disagrees with the current theory of gravity (General Relativity Theory), which posits that the expansion of the Universe should be slowing down. Model Mechanics predicted the accelerated expansion of these far reached regions of the universe in 1993.</li> <li>The observed rotational curves of the galaxies disagree with the predictions of GRT. The existence of a dark matter was introduced to explain these anomalous rotational curves. Model Mechanics posits the existence of dark matter in the form of free SParticles.</li> <li>The observed path of travel of the Pioneer 10 spacecraft disagrees with the predicted path given by GRT. Pioneer 10 was observed to be in a state of accelerated motion toward the Sun. Model Mechanics explains the anomalous path of Pioneer 10 by the existence of dark matter in the form of free SParticles in the Sun.</li> <li>The observable universe appears to have a larger horizon than it is allowed by its age. An ad hoc hypothesis called Inflation was invented to overcome the observed horizon problem. The inflation hypothesis allows space to expand at speed faster than that of light and thus avoiding the observed horizon problem. Model Mechanics resolved the horizon problem naturally without resorting to the Inflation hypothesis.</li></ol><p>Model Mechanics leads to a new theory of gravity called Doppler Theory of Gravity (DTG) and unites gravity with the electromagnetic and nuclear forces naturally. It also leads to a complete theory of relativity called IRT (Improved Relativity Theory). IRT includes SRT as a subset. However, unlike SRT, the equations of IRT are valid in all environments?including gravity. Model Mechanics is based on the existence of absolute motion of objects in a stationary and structured lightconducting medium called the EMatrix. It is the main objective of this proposal to design and perform experiments to confirm the existence absolute motion in the EMatrix.</p><p>This paper is aka “Cosmology Based On Absolute Motion”.</p> 
Universe within Universe 
Pal Asija 
This paper postulates a virtual Universe within our known physical Universe occupying same space and time. It compares and contrasts properties, similarities, differences and relationships between the two universes. A particular attention is paid to the interface between the two and the challenges of building and/or traversing bridges between them. A number of inflection points between the two are identified. The paper also delineates their relationship to big bang, theory of evolution, gravity, dark matter, black holes, time travel, speed of light, theory of relativity and string theory just to name a few. Several new terms are introduced and defined to discuss proper relationship, transition and interface between the body, brain and mind of physical bodies & beings with that of virtual, meta and ultra bodies and beings and how the ?Virtual Inside? relates to people, pets, plants and particles and their micro constituents as well as macro sets. The past, present, potential and elsewhere of the concurrent universes is compared along with many myths and misconceptions of the modern physics. Finally possible pathways to the discovery of TOE (Theory of Everything) are hypothesized. 
Using E = mc^2 Consistently to Reveal Aether Details and to Unify Physics 
Carl R. Littmann 
Einstein wisely predicted that when the Sun loses a given mass, m, the sun radiates an amount of energy, mc^2. A purer case occurs when an electron and a positron mass interact and annihilate, and energy radiation occurs. But it is wrong and inconsistent to assume that only photon energy results and flies away from the scene, since that assumption disregards ?gravity’ (or ?graviton’ generation). Despite the fact that the ?gravitational effect’ is extremely small, it exists; and some highenergy photons have given up some of their energy (and mass) to create something (i.e., gravitons) even before the photons have completely left the scene. That is what Mossbauer experiments imply, and also what consistent application of E=mc^2 requires; even though gravity is classified as a ?very weak force’ and associated energy. When ?inconsistent Einstein Theorists’ neglected or lost those SMALL ?gravitons’; they also lost a LARGE Concept; and also lost their chance for a fine Grand Unification Theory. In this paper, we retrieve both; and we calculate an effective ‘gravitonic’ ethereal density, and a typical graviton’s energy and mass. Addendum to Abstract (4152009): The <em>following two sentences</em> replace one that previously speculated about gravitons’ second or third order effects. <em>”Gravitons contribute to an aether, which easily also produces the pressure required for the ‘nuclear force paradigm’.” “Some other comments about this Abstract are found on page 1 of my article.”</em> 
Using the Mind to Heal the Body 
Harold McCoy 
During this lecture, the author shares his theories regarding the connection between emotional distress and the appearance of illnesses in the body; that by energetically clearing emotional issues we can frequently bring about physical healing. The author describes the mediation and visualization techniques he uses to aid others in their healing process, including: Techniques for bringing prosperity to a business or individual, reversing the aging process, and connecting with one?s higher source. The author shares his experiences as a healer and talk about several documented successes. The author has established a record of many incredible healings ? from tumors to diabetes to uterine problems, all using the ?Power of the Focused Mind?. He has been involved in a research study with the National Institute of Health for his work on fast growing brain tumors (glioblastoma). His work is in very high demand, as he is booked several months in advance for healings and workshops. His mission is to teach as many people as possible the techniques that he uses to accomplish healing. 
Why Special Relativity? 
Clarence L. Dulaney 
In this centennial year of Albert Einstein?s paper ?Zur Elektrodynamik bewegter Korper?, it seems pertinent to ask what possessed Einstein to write this paper. He stated two reasons: first, he wanted to resolve the ?asymmetries? of the explanation of relative movements of a magnet and a conductor; second, he wanted to show that the speed of light in free space is independent of the motion of the emitter. This paper shows that his explanation of the ?asymmetries? was vague, and that he presented an incorrect equation in his ?proof? of the second objective. 
Zinfinity Space 
Stavros T. Tassos, David Ford 
Zinfinity Space reexamines cosmology, astronomy, quantum mechanics and particle physics upon the fundamental principle that finite does not exist in any physical sense. Space is considered the necessary infinite source of all mass, which becomes measurable, via anisotropic distribution of space by ‘particles’, which are standing waves, ‘waving’ space itself. Matter and light are sine waveforms of local anisotropy in the elastic, largescale isotropic continuum. The elastic continuum is lossless, provides all cosmic material ‘mass’, accounts for both ‘missingmass’ and ‘darkenergy’, has infinite elasticity to any energy input up to <em>v</em> less than <em>c</em>, and infinite rigidity at <em>v</em> greater than <em>c</em>. Gravity is anisotropic tension within infinite elasticity. Gravity’s inverse quantity is ‘mass’ space density, i.e., anisotropic space distribution results in <em>m</em> and <em>G</em>. Thus <em>E</em> is likewise anisotropy of space, in whatever expressed or potential form. All waveparticles contain a constant quantum of tensional elastic potential, irrespective of wavelength, as per <em>E=hf</em> . The total volume of the potentially observable cosmos is limited by constant speed of light and expansion rate. This observable volume is the ‘Optical Bubble’. As linear expansion occurs, the total tensional elastic energy of the cosmos (<em>G</em>), rises proportionally, thus counteracting entropic dissipation, whilst total elastic space density (<em>m</em>), inversely and proportionally decreases, as one. Astronomical Doppler redshifts within Zinfinity Space never exceed <em>z</em><em>=</em>0.57, all higher components are nonDoppler, attributed to continuous linear rise in frequency of emission of photons, from standing wave ‘matter’. NonDoppler components can be instrumentally measured and differentiated from Doppler components, via amplitude peak:wavelength ratios (P:W) of all photons. Expansion is thus reinterpreted as perfectly linear, and space geometry, perfectly Euclidean. Harmonic relationships between primary natural constants verify Zinfinity Space and confirm absolute absence of finite at any scale of observation. 