Dates: 2006-04-03 – 2006-04-07

Where: Tulsa, OK, United States

Venue: University of Tulsa

The Natural Philosophy Alliance (NPA) is devoted mainly to broad-ranging, fully open-minded 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

Action-at-a-Distance on the Light Cone
Dr. Al F. Kracklauer
I will present a description of a modified version of what is known as the ?Wheeler-Feynman action-at-a-distance? formulation of relativistic electrodynamics, but devoid of advanced interaction and asymmetric aging. I will describe initial results of a study using this formulation to analyze time dilation experiments using muon decay which shows that this is a space-time perspective effect that does not contribute to asymmetric aging (the twin paradox).
Nonlocality, Unreality, and Bell Theorem
Dr. Al F. Kracklauer
I argue that Bell?s argument for nonlocality is the result of an error in the use of Bayes? formula. By correcting this error all derivations of Bell Inequalities become impossible. Further, I show by direct construction and simulation that the data from EPR- and GHZ-type experiments can be explained by the classical formulas for higher order correlations. Additionally, I argue that irreality is a consequence of the assumption that QM is complete. Superposition of mutually exclusive states arise in classical mechanics for coupled oscillators where the energy sloshes back and forth between two modes.
Universal Gravity Hypothesis
Prof. Aleksandr M. Tsybin
The Universal Law of Gravity is formulated as: (1), where represents the force of gravity between two masses, and represents the distance between the centers of gravity of these masses, and (2). Other values are [F] N (Newton); [M] and [m] KG (Kilograms), and [R] M (Meters). Let us rewrite Eq. (1) as: (3), where represents a vector, measured in , which can be interpreted as consumption acceleration rate. What kind of consumption in this?; We believe this is the neutrino consumption, as vacuum is filled with neutrinos. If there is body with mass on neutrinos flow path, neutrinos pass through this body, as their penetration capability is enormous, however, the speed of neutrino flow is increasing. This process resembles the process of fish being drawn into fishing net. Hence, if neutrinos are removed from vacuum (and we do not know how to do this), vacuum will not have any gravity. Possibly, we are talking about all kinds of neutrinos ? electronic and mesonic. Thus, the gravitational constant is the acceleration rate of neutrino flow when it passes through a body with a mass of 1 kilogram. We can also presume that the speed of neutrinos inside this body will exceed the speed of light. This is comparable to the increased liquid flow rate in a narrowed river bed in comparison to a free riverbed. And, as the speed of neutrinos inside the body will exceed the speed of light in the body, the body might glow due to the Vavilov-Cherenkov effect. 

Additional considerations:

Let us consider water typhoons, cyclones and anticyclones in the air, and spiral galaxies. If we ignore the difference in scale of the above phenomena, it can be said that they are very alike. It this a coincidence? Let us talk about the sizes of the above phenomena. Cyclones and anti cyclones in the air differ from typhoons in the ocean in their linear dimensions approximately 10 fold. Linear dimensions of typhoons are measured in hundreds of kilometers, and linear dimensions of cyclones or anticyclones in the air are measured in thousands of kilometers. At the same time, water density is approximately 1000 times higher than air density. Cube root of 1000 is 10. Linear dimensions of spiral galaxies fluctuate at meters, i.e. linear dimensions of spiral galaxies on average are times bigger than linear dimensions of typhoons in the water. Thus, we can presume that the speed of neutrino flow istimes less than water density. According to a number of authors (E.Y. Vilkoviski, Marks, Salai, and others) the neutrino number in 1 is . Hence we can determine neutrino mass to be at , which is very close to the data published in 1980 by V.A. Lubimov, E.F. Tretiakov and others. According to the data obtained through their experiments the neutrino rest mass is grams. The considerations discussed above can be viewed as preliminary estimations that lead to conclusion that spiral galaxy is a stationary cyclone in neutrino ocean, which, according to many researchers, is the most probable carrier of the so-called hidden mass in the Universe. There is one more indirect consideration. According to the Estonian astophysicist Einasto and others, the large-scale structure of Universe reminds of honeycombs. Additionally, the galaxies are located only on the faces of the honeycombs, the linear size of which is approximately 200 megaparsec or meters. It is still unclear if such cells exist in non-viscous liquid. Using a far from accurate method of analogy we can presume that the size of such cell for fresh water should be approximately 150000 km. There are no such on the Earth. For air or gas media the linear size of such cell is 1.5 ? 2 millions of kilometers, and similar cells are discovered in the stars atmospheres and on the Sun. Based on that, we can once again determine the rest mass of neutrino, which will be close to the determined above values.

The Role of Revelation in the Act of Science
Alex Ceapa
Reprinted in Proceedings of the NPA, V3, N1, pp. 95, 111, 130. An “act of science’ is the birth of any new idea, or set of coupled ideas, contributing to the advance of science. Today no role is granted to ‘revelation’, as disclosure by God, in an act of science. Science and secularization have worked together to establish this idea that science and divine work must be antimonies. This has led to a crisis in modern physics
Breaking Mentalities
Alex Ceapa
Science policy is an interference of obscure interests and mentalities affecting the efficiency of the act of science. If they cannot influence science policy, scientists can instead break mentalities, so substantially improving their performance. Consider our derivation of the LT (GED 05) as effect of the determination by light signals of the radius vectors changing systematically over time in direction and magnitude with respect to inertial observers. The initially assumed concepts of absolute rest (by coordinate systems at absolute rest with axes not determined by bodies of a reference frame), absolute time (by inertial identical clocks running at a rate independent of their speeds) and determinable absolute speeds -the opposite of Einstein?s- were validated by our derivation of the LT. They were validated in SRT by the explanation given to the manipulation of equations which led Einstein to the LT in 1905. In their turn, by b x=Cartesian coordinate and b t=Newtonian time, they validated the classical principle of the physical determination of equations in SRT and the relativistic quantum theories, raising genuine subquantum information with application to radically new technologies. Einstein?s development of SRT without his 1905 derivation of the LT (against its correctness and impact) proves the essential part played by revelation in the act of science, that scientists deliberate decisions disturb the revealed knowledge, involving, in the best case ?incomprehensible? works. Dirac?s and der Waerden?s failing in obtaining the subquantum information at their time supports this conclusion. The rationale we gave to Einstein?s 1905 derivation of the LT shows -for the first time- that rationales can be provided to some revealed knowledge. Therefore, scientists can, breaking the atheistic mentality (beneficiary of a formidable logistics), as well as the mentality that revealed knowledge cannot be turned into rational knowledge, to substantially improve their creative performance.
Asteroid or Comet? That is the Question
Alexander A. Scarborough
In 1802 Heinrich Olbers identified the Asteroids as remnants of a disintegrated planet. Substantiated evidence in the scientific literature supports the accuracy of his observations; e.g, the Four Laws of Planetary Motion (1609-1995) reveal how Planet Asteroids was placed in the fifth position among ten original planetary orbits around our Sun during the dynamic layout of the Solar System some five billion years ago. Most remnants of the disintegrated planet(s) still occupy their planetary orbit(s) as small, irregularly shaped planetoids classified as three types of asteroids: stony solids, stony comet shells, and metallic, with the largest, Ceres, being an integrated Moon-like combination of the three types. In 1794 Ernst Chladi published a first work arguing for the cosmic origin of cometary fireballs and the generic connection between fireballs, meteriorites, and meteors. Substantiated evidence adds strong support to his findings; e.g., the burned-out shells of Phobos and Deimos (the two inactive moons of Mars) are shown to be former fiery comets. Evidence reveals that comets are periodic ejecta from larger nuclear energy masses, and are relatively short-lived in terms of a few thousand years. Specific examples are given. The evidence clearly differentiates between asteroids and comets, while revealing that they are neither planetary building blocks nor primordial leftovers from a Big Bang — findings that are proving essential to understanding our Solar System?s origin, anomalies, history, and future changes as functions of time.
Origins of Universal Systems: From Myth to Reality in Twelve Giant Steps and 2500 Years
Alexander A. Scarborough
This paper pulls together twelve significant discoveries crucial to understanding the origins and evolution of universal systems. Beginning around 500 B.C. with discoveries and beliefs of the Pythagoreans, the presentation progresses briefly through the prinicipal works of Aristotle, Copernicus, Kepler, Newton , Descartes, Olbers, Einstein, Hubble, Chladni, and this author, right into the 21st century. Interlocked via sound logic and substantiated evidence, these discoveries nudge science away from the Poe/Laplace Big-Bang/Accretion hypothesis, and toward a new direction of revolutionary scientific thought: the Little Bangs (LB), Four Laws of Planetary Motion (FL), Internal Nucleosynthesis (IN), that drives all Evolution (E) in the LB/FLINE model of universal origins and evolution.
What is a Planet?
Alexander A. Scarborough
All planets began as small cometary-like stars that now have evolved into the second, third, fourth, or fifth stage of spherical planetary evolution at rates in full accord with size and time. The best-known examples are, respectively, Jupiter (gaseous), Uranus (transitional), Earth (rocky), and Mercury (inactive). Planets are self-sustaining entities, generally revolving around a larger central mass while evolving through five observable stages of evolution (E) via internal nucleo-synthesis (IN) and in full compliance with natural laws of planetary systems; e.g., the laws of planetary motion, gravity, and the ongoing energy-matter relationship expressed as E=mc2(?). Other than different rates of evolution and subsequent variations in compositional matter, spherical size is immaterial. However, in every case, IN and E are crucial: one cannot exist without the other during the billions of years of transformation of their nuclear energy cores into planetary matter.This paper is aka “What Are Planets?”
Minimum Contradictions Everything & Ether and Forces? Unification
Prof. Athanassios A. Nassikas
The various theories of physics are based on axioms which by definition are arbitrary. Perhaps axioms? arbitrariness is the reason of theories? contradictions which have been until now revealed. Basic purpose of previous papers was to show that there is a privileged set of axioms in physics and this is the set of axioms on which our basic communication system is based. It can be proved that this system is contradictory. When, despite this contradiction we communicate in a way that we consider logical, this means that we try to understand things through minimum possible contradictions since contradictions are never vanished. The claim for minimum contradictions which in an application area is compatible with Okham?s razor, despite being completely general, can lead by itself to the statement of a minimum contradictions physics unified theory. Under certain simplifications both the relativity theory and the QM can derive; spacetime is stochastic and its geometry is described by the aid of a wave function. The electromagnetic (em) spacetime is a spacetime whose all magnitudes are considered imaginary and behave exactly like the gravitational (g) one; the (em) spacetime coexists with the (g) one, the two of them being interconnected. On this basis, a spacetime QM can be made. According to this paper Quantum Space Time & Ether is the substance within which the things exist and from which the things are made. On this basis minimum contradictions ether geometry and forces can be found; they describe quantum gravity in general and include a unified gravitational acceleration formula. This formula can apply to: 1) the strong nuclear force (quantum gravity); 2) gravity [by the aid of this general formula, under certain simplifications, applied to (g) and (em) space, Newton and Coulomb (attraction-repulsion) laws derive]; 3) the electromagnetic force (because of the Coulomb law); 4) the electro-weak force ( for reasons following). According to the spirit of this work any infinitesimal area of reality is described, by the aid of a Hypothetical Measuring Field (HMF), by local equivalent particle equations; i.e. Schrodinger?s relativistic equations for (g) and (em) space – in absence of potential – and energy and momentum conservation equations of the local equivalent (g) and (em) particle fields regarded as a whole; on this basis electric forces, in presence of radiation, can be described by the general formula mentioned and this is compatible with the electro-weak force. In this way basic requirements for a theory of everything (TOE) to be stated can be regarded as fulfilled. Author?s Relevant Papers-References: “More on Minimum Contradictions in Physics”. Galilean Electrodynamics – GED-East, Special Issues 2, 15. From the Editor. (2001); “The Claim for Minimum Contradictions and its Consequences in Thinking and Physics”, presented at the Vienna Circle International Symposium, 2001; “Minimum Contradictions Physics as a New Paradigm”, presented at the NPA Conference, 2003. Journal of New Energy; “The Hypothesis of the Quantum Space Time – Aether”, a) Congress-98 Fundamental Problems of Natural Sciences, Russian Academy of Science. St. Petersburg, Russia (1998) b) Galilean Electrodynamics & GED East, Special Issues 2, 11, 34-40 (2000); “Basic Statements Required for a Minimum Contradictions Everything”, presented at the NPA Conference, 2004.
The Hotson / Westergard Universe
Billie Westergard
This paper questions the current paradigm of Structure Formation in the Early Big Bang Universe. The existing, yet unbelievable, paradigm requires a universal volume of hot, expanding, homogeneous, and isotropic gas consisting of only hydrogen, helium, and radiation (with minute amounts of deuterium and lithium) to have formed countless numbers of galaxies within 100 million years of the decoupling of matter from radiation. Some of the Ultra Deep field galaxies appear to be 10 billion years older than the age of the early Big Bang itself. We show observational and experimental evidence for a non-expanding universe in which structure formation of stars, galaxies, quasars, elements, gas, dust etc. is a replicating process. It is: a process of structure formation (birth) from the inside out, rather than collapse from the outside in. It is a universe in which the laws of conservation and causality are not violated; a universe in which action at a distance and the cause of gravitation are explained and unification of the four forces is achieved; a negative and positive energy universe far removed from the old, obsolete, sick, bandaged, and dying Big Bang.
Degenerate Angular Momentum in the Hotson-Westergard Universe Model.pdf
Connecting Newtonian Mechanics to Special Relativistic Mechanics: Einstein’s Mistake
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 the two theories in the domain of low speed.This paper is aka “Einstein’s Mistake on the Connection of Newtonian Mechanics to Special Relativistic Mechanics”
High and Low Strength Forces in our Universe
Carl R. Littmann
We note in our Universe vastly different strength forces, ranging from the strong nuclear forces to the weak gravitational. We theorize that in each case the material density involved determines the limiting steady force. Thus, nuclear forces are stronger than gravitational by a factor (10^+38) because nuclear densities are roughly (10^+38) times denser than the ‘thin’ aether in space! We assume that a great gas-like ethereal pressure exists to hold the spinning proton together, and we calculate it, i.e., about 10^+33 (newt/sq. m). We postulate a ‘spinning aether ball’ with a circumference equal to the Bohr hydrogen atom, and with a spin angular momentum roughly equal to the proton’s. From all that, we calculate aether’s very low density, about 10^-20 (kgm/cu.m). That is roughly equal to the vacuum in space between planets. That is, indeed, about (10^-38) less dense than a proton’s nuclear density. We speculate that elementary particles wiggle at roughly the velocity of light. And that causes a moving Bernoulli equation-related ‘aether-space constriction’; and suction to arise between them, (i.e., Gravity)!
The Cosmological Red Shift as a Gravitational Interaction of Photons with Masses in Space
Charles E. Weber
The dependence of the frequency shift of photons on the cosine of the angle made with a gravitational field is an approximation because of the fact that the photon’s trajectory changes such as to bring the photon closer to the mass as it passes. Therefore it dives up out of a slightly deeper well than it dived down into upon passing a mass. Therefore the red shift leaving will be slightly greater than the blue shift approaching. It follows that photons should have a slight residual red shift upon passing those masses in space that are either stationary, moving parallel to, or moving toward the trajectory. This shift is proposed as the main cause of the cosmological red shift since masses moving away from the trajectory should be a minority.
The Cosmological Red Shift
Derivation of the Classical Universal Electrodynamic Force
Dr. Charles William Lucas Jr.
A new universal electromagnetic force law for real finite-size 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, and Lenz?s law assuming Galilean invariance. This derived version of the electromagnetic force law incorporates the effects of the self-fields of real finite-size elastic particles as observed in particle scattering experiments. It can account for gravity, inertia, and relativistic effects including radiation. The non-radial terms of the force law explain the experimentally observed curling of plasma currents, the tilting of the orbits of the planets with respect to the equatorial plane of the sun, and certain inertial gyroscope motions. The derived force law satisfies Newton?s third law, conservation of energy and momentum, conservation of charge, and Mach?s Principle. The mathematical properties of equations for the fundamental empirical laws and also Hooper?s experiments showing that the fields of a moving charge move with the charge require that the electrodynamic force be a contact force based on field extensions of the charge instead of action-at-a-distance. The Lorentz force is derived from Galilean invariance. The most general form of the force law, derived using all the higher order terms of the Galilean transformation, is assumed to be exact for all phenomena on all size scales. Arguments are given that this force law is superior to all previous force laws, i.e. relativistic quantum electrodynamic, gravitational, inertial, strong interaction and weak interaction force laws.
The Electrodynamic Origin of the Force of Gravity
Dr. Charles William Lucas Jr.
The force of gravity is shown to be a statistical residual force due to the fourth order terms in v/c of the derived universal classical electrodynamic force between vibrating neutral dipoles consisting of atomic electrons vibrating with respect to protons in the nucleus of neutral atoms. The derived gravitational force has the customary radial term plus a new non-radial term. From the radial term the gravitational mass is defined in terms of electrodynamic parameters. The non-radial term causes the orbits of the planets about the sun to spiral about a circular orbit giving the appearance of an elliptical orbit tilted with respect to the equatorial plane of the sun. The vibrational mechanism causing the gravitational force slowly decays over time giving rise to the expansion of the planets (including the earth) and moons in our solar system, the cosmic background radiation, Hubble?s red shifts versus distance due to gravitational red shifting, Tifft?s quantized red shifts as a type of Bode?s law, and Tifft?s measured decay of the magnitude of red shifts over time. Arguments will be given that this derived law of gravity is superior to Newton?s Universal Law of Gravitation and Einstein?s General Relativity Theory.
The Electrodynamic Origin of the Force of Inertia
Dr. Charles William Lucas Jr.
The force of inertial is shown to be a statistical residual force due to the acceleration terms in the derived universal electrodynamic force between vibrating neutral dipoles consisting of atomic electrons vibrating with respect to protons in the nucleus of neutral atoms. The inertial mass is derived and shown to be equal to the gravitational mass. The vibrational mechanism for both gravitational and inertial mass causes the magnitude of both masses to decay over time. The inertial force has a non-radial term , which causes certain observed non-Newtonian inertial gyroscopic motions that will be demonstrated. Arguments will be given that this derived law of inertia is superior to Newton’s Law of Inertia.
A Classical Electrodynamic String Theory of Elementary Particles
Dr. Charles William Lucas Jr.
Foundations of Science is the quarterly journal of Common Sense Science, founded by David L. Bergman and Dr. Charles W. (Bill) Lucas in 1998. It features physical models of elementary particles and atomic structures and force and gravitational formulations, all based on electrodynamics. The editors present their finding from a Christian worldview. Common Sense Science offers all of the CSS Newsletter lead articles for download, without the correspondence and supplemental material in the Newsletter.
A Classical Electrodynamic Theory of the Atom
Dr. Charles William Lucas Jr.
A classical electrodynamic geometrical packing model for the structure of the atom is developed based on the derived universal electrodynamic force law. This model incorporates the physical structures of electrons from the classical electrodynamic string model of elementary particles. From the physical characteristics of real electrons this work derives, using combinatorial geometry, the number and orientation of electrons that will pack into the various physical shells about the nucleus in agreement with the observed structure of the Periodic Table of the Elements. The constraints used in the combinatorial geometry derivation are based upon simple ring dipole magnet experiments and spherical symmetry. This model of the atom, based on finite-size ring electrons, gives rise to a new mechanism for the binding of atoms to form molecules. Instead of valence point electrons performing orbits about two nuclei to bind them together, stationary ring electrons bind atoms together electrically and magnetically. Each electron acts as a small ring magnet. From a magnetic basis the model explains the reason why the periodic table has only seven periods. The new classical model predicts new states for the stationary electron in the extreme ultraviolet not possible for orbiting point electrons in quantum type theories. NASA rocket space probes found 64 lines in the emission spectrum of hydrogen in the extreme ultraviolet in perfect agreement with the predictions of this new ring model of the hydrogen atom. Arguments are given showing the superiority of the classical model of the atom over relativistic quantum models.
A Classical Electrodynamic Theory of the Nucleus
Dr. Charles William Lucas Jr.
A classical electrodynamic geometrical packing model for the structure of the nucleus is developed based on the derived universal electrodynamic force law. This model incorporates the physical structures of electrons, protons, and neutrons from the classical electrodynamic string model of elementary particles. From the physical characteristics of these real particles this work derives, using combinatorial geometry, the number and orientation of electrons and protons that will pack into the various physical shells of the nucleus in agreement with the observed structure of the Table of the Nuclides. In this model neutrons inside the nucleus polarize into electrons and protons. The model accurately predicts the nuclear “magic numbers” indicative of nuclear shell structure, the spin of all nuclides, and explains the physical origin of the liquid drop features of nuclides. Arguments are given showing the superiority of this classical model of the nucleus over relativistic quantum and liquid drop models.
The Electrodynamic Origin of Life in Organic Molecules Such As DNA and Proteins
Dr. Charles William Lucas Jr.
The evidence for the electrodynamic origin of life in organic molecules such as DNA and proteins is presented. It is based on the same type of approach used by Schroedinger that lead to the discovery of DNA. Experimentally the Orgone Laboratory Life-Energy field meter measures the absorption of longitudinal radiation on any object put near its short-range detector. Measurements of the absorption of longitudinal radiation by plants, fruits and vegetables, and animals including man in various experiments seem to correlate well with the expected life energy of those bodies. Dr. Antoine Priore of France has demonstrated on thousands of animals the healing power of longitudinal waves from his giant plasma tube. From previous work on the universal electrodynamic force, it is claimed that longitudinal waves are absorbed on large chiral organic molecules causing them to vibrate longitudinally like a long spring. This longitudinal vibration causes an organic molecule to be “alive”. According to electrodynamics all vibrational motion must decay by radiating. The consumption of food by organisms provides a fresh supply of longitudinally vibrating molecules that share their longitudinal vibrational energy in order to maintain the longitudinal vibrations of the DNA, proteins, and other organic molecules of the organism.
C, Charged Particles, Electrodynamics, Radiation and All That
Dr. Clarence L. Dulaney
Basically, C arises, along with all the other topics in the title from relative motion of charged particles. In 1893, J.J. Thomson showed theoretically that C should be the limiting speed of a charged particle. He attributed this to an increase of mass of the particle with speed. Weberian Electrodynamics is based on the relative motion of charged particles, and accounts for the radiation from accelerated charged particles. A. Einstein is incorrect in stating that the speed of light in free space is not affected by the speed of the source. This is shown by the “red shift” of the spectrum of stars that are moving away from the earth-bound observer.
On What Optical Systems Can See
Dr. Cynthia Kolb Whitney
It is a dictum of Einstein?s Special Relativity Theory (SRT) that the strictly inertial motion of any physical system cannot be detected without some reference external to the system. This dictum has been tested through the years by a variety of optical experiments. Usually, the motivation has been to re-open the case with regard to the concept of a ?luminiferous aether?, which had dominated much of scientific thought in the century before Einstein?s revolution. Results have generally been proclaimed ?null?, although in actuality they have sometimes been rather ambiguous, and the more so the more recent the work is. But aversion to anything like the old ?luminiferous aether? still hinders acknowledgment of any such results. It is my belief that any linear velocity with respect to which an optical system can be reversed can indeed be sensed, but that the proper inference to be drawn from that fact does not concern any kind of ?luminiferous aether?, or even modern ?physical ether?. Instead, the proper inference is that revision of Einstein?s light speed postulate is needed. A modified postulate, different but still ether-free, is shown to lead to observed results.
On What Electromagnetic Systems Can Feel
Dr. Cynthia Kolb Whitney
Within the classical description of the electromagnetic fields that are created by a rapidly moving source, there exists a fascinating curiosity. The curiosity is revealed in a simple scenario in which the source traverses a sinusoid in a plane as viewed by a stationary observer. This motion is a superposition of two basic parts: a high-speed linear translation, plus a low-amplitude harmonic oscillation. The linear translation creates Coulomb-Ampere fields, and the oscillation creates radiation fields. The curiosity is that, while the Poynting vector for the radiation is always pointing from the ?causally-connected?, or ?retarded?, position of the source, the Coulomb attraction/repulsion never is. The classical description that produces this curiosity dates from the turn of the twentieth century, with the work of Lienard and Wiechert. Although their work predates Einstein?s work, it is nevertheless consistent with his light speed postulate, and so has survived along with his Special Relativity Theory (SRT) for all this time, despite any curiosities that ensue. It is my belief that appropriately revising the postulate can remove this curiosity, as well as all other curiosities attendant to SRT.
About Albert Einstein and on the Meaning of his Relativities
Dan Romalo
The essay presents the author?s point of view on Albert Einstein?s complex personality and on his relativistic philosophy. Yet, the true aim of the expose is to remind us of some older but still significant problems concerning the basics of the Theory of Relativity, suggesting some alternative explanatory hypotheses. The present essay tries to:
2. Analyze the fundamentals of Albert Einstein?s principles
3. Compare Albert Einstein?s relativist philosophy with H.E. Ives? intuitive one – based on G.F. Fitzgerald, H. A. Lorentz and H. Poincare works
4. Propose some suggestions for a more intuitively principled relativism
5. Sketch the base-lines for a tentative model of the universe supposed born inside a bubble of ether.
The essay leans on a demonstration delivered long ago by Ives, widely despised or neglected, and now seemingly forgotten; it is The Fitzgerald Contraction [Scientific Proceedings of the Royal Dublin Society, new series, 26 (1052, pp. 9-26] and on the more recent article of Horst E. Wilhelm, [Z. f. Naturforschung, 45 a, 736-748 (1990)] who demonstrates, or just confirms, that the Fitzgerald-Lorentz contraction has to be real because it is a strict consequence of the electromagnetic field theory itself. Perhaps it is not quite inadequate to try to understand the profound meaning of Ives works, and to think about it.
About Albert Einstein and on the Meaning of his Relativities
Physical/Gravitational Interaction as a Two-State Problem
Dmitri V. Plotnikov
Three hundred years ago the great scientist Isaac Newton formulated the law of universal gravitation, which explained the falling of bodies: . Since then, many scientists have attempted to interpret the law of universal gravitation, trying to answer the question ?Why does the attraction between masses occur??. The lack of success in answering the question can be explained by several causes: 1) Prior to the 20th century discovery of quantum mechanics, attempts to interpret the law by methods of classical mechanics were doomed; 2) Attempts to treat this law as something exceptional are also not justified, as there is nothing exceptional in Nature; 3) Attempts to oversimplify the approach to this problem have been doomed to failure. Today the problem remains both challenging and tempting. Would it be possible to overcome gravity? If so, this would constitute a new era for mankind. However, this question should follow after others. First, what is gravity? And only having understood its nature, one may ask, Is it possible? and How? The present work proceeds from the notion of unity of natural phenomena. Slight interaction, by virtue of natural similarity, must resemble the exchange interaction. But what the masses exchange has remained a puzzle. Many scientists believe the answer is gravitons. But what is a graviton? And why do we fail to register this particle? Having tried a lot of options, I decided on analyzing one of the issues from quantum mechanics, namely the problem of two states: upward spin and downward spin. I will try to explain why in the paper. I have found much in common between the notion of two states and physics of slight interactions.
The Spinning Charged Ring
Dr. Domina Eberle Spencer , Dr. Uma Y. Shama, Terri L. Mascardo, Dr. Philip J. Mann
The simplest model of a charge cluster is a spinning charged ring. The gravitational and electromagnetic forces must add to zero if charge clusters are to be in dynamic equilibrium. The paper investigates whether spinning rings of charge can be in dynamic equilibrium according to classical electromagnetic theory and according to the New Gaussian electromagnetic theory.
Field Structure Theory
Don Briddell
Field Structures begins with a discussion of the concept of action, the simplest notion we have about anything. FST shows a structural system that postulates a loop of action and then shows how these loops of action can interact to produce three-dimensional action event that organize fractally according to Field Structure mechanics to produce energy and mass structural systems that in nature are the fundamental boson/fermion particles. Field Structures show with working models (that will be shown and demonstrated) how action organizes itself. These are structures that are unique and new to science. Field Structure Theory will show how it is possible to begin with the simplest of all possible notions (action), produce radiant energy waves which interact with themselves to produce closed standing waves, which in turn interact to produce a particle, which interact at a higher field order to form atoms, and so on up the hierarchy to molecules, and beyond; all this made possible by a simple loop of action. I will briefly review the basic building block forms shown at Storrs meeting in 2005, and then go on to show exactly how these structures can determine particle characteristics. Field Structures show how fields can be understood supporting the idea with charts, graphs and tables in a Power Point presentation how fields and particles are related. The 3-D ‘stop time’ models to be shown and demonstrated freezes the blistering motion of a particle so their inherent and underlying structure can be examined at our scale of experience. Once the structural system is explained, and due to the limitations of presenting time, the presentation will only be able to show two important issues in physics: 1) how these Field Structures generate the known mass values with which physics is familiar, and 2) why there are only two stable rest mass particles, the electron and proton. This presentation will not be physics as you know it. This approach had to be taken in order to understand where mass values come from. It is a new way of seeing physical reality as the end result of structuring together loops of action to form spatial events that delineate motion, momentum and position.
Physics? Biggest 20th Century Conceptual BooBoo: The Truth Seems More Classical Than We Thought
Dr. Evert Jan Post
This title refers to the concept or conceivable existence of a nonclassical psi function statistics. At least two counter examples exist, which show there is no compelling need whatsoever to take recourse to this nonclassical measure. The concept of a nonclassical psi function statistics must be considered as logically flawed, and should be neither admissible in mathematics nor in physics. Preliminary delineations about this have been in the public domain for some time, yet there is great reluctance to confront this situation by having an all encompassing topical conference solely devoted to this predicament.This paper is aka “Physics? Biggest Conceptual BooBoo in the 20th Century”
A New Hypothesis on Light
Gin Conesa
Throughout the last three centuries, corpuscle, wave and photon have been the prevailing ideas and hypothesis on the nature of Light. We consider that all this confusion might have been caused by the lack of awareness on the existence of the magnetosphere, along with certain conceptual difficulties in the understanding of the consequences of Galileo’s relativity. We propose here the following hypothesis: “light is a simple perturbation of the electromagnetic values of the empty space” (space which is free from matter, but has electric and magnetic field values (E, B)). This hypothesis, plus the fact that the magnetosphere and some classical Physics laws exist, is enough to explain experiences on electrodynamics whose interpretation, in the past, has lead to the present situation: Bradley’s stellar aberration [J. Bradley, Phil. Trans 34, 637 (1728)] and Airy’s [G. Airy, Proc. Roy. Soc. 20, 35-38 (1871)], Arago’s experiment on the speed of light [D.F.J. Arago, Comp. Rend. Ac. Sc. 36, 38 (1853)], and the Michelson-Morley experiment [A.A. Michelson & E. Morley, Am. J. Sci. 3? series, 34, (Nov. 1887)]. This new hypothesis also leads us to suggest new ideas for the explanation of other well-known effects of Light: the Sagnac effect [G. Sagnac, Comp. Rend. Ac. Sc. 157, 708 (1913)], reflection, refraction, double refraction, Fresnel’s drag, photoelectric effect, etc. Finally we propose an experiment that we consider crucial: “the drag of Light through a moving magnetic field”.
Does the Sun Orbit a Dark Star?
Glen W. Deen
The precession of the equinoxes was discovered in the second century BC by Hipparchus, and it was described as a slow revolution of the whole field of stars about the ecliptic poles. This could be explained if the Sun orbited some unseen object. The modern explanation was given by Newton as being the slow rotation of the Earth?s polar axis about the ecliptic poles caused by gravitational forces from the Sun and Moon on the non-uniform mass distribution in the oblate Earth. In the first model, the Earth?s celestial equator is fixed in space, and the celestial sphere appears to rotate. In the modern model, the celestial sphere is fixed, and the celestial equator rotates. These two models are indistinguishable by astronomical observations. This paper computes a range of possible solar orbits, depending only on the assumed mass of the unseen attractor, that were obtained by minimizing the squared error in the ecliptic longitude of Regulus as measured by Hipparchus circa 128 BC, Ptolemy in 138 AD, 11 observations by Arabic astronomers in the period of A.D. 830-975, the modern longitude of Regulus, and the modern precession rate. An intriguing possibility is that many transneptunian objects and long-period comets may orbit the same attractor that the Sun orbits. Pluto could have been captured by the Sun, if it had been deflected by Neptune. The goal of this line of research is to see if there is a particular attractor mass that will cause Pluto to have been captured by the Sun.
The Postulates of Both Galilean And Special Relativity Have Been Violated by the U2 Anisotropy Experiment of Smoot et al
Dr. Hartwig Wolfgang Thim
The first postulate of special relativity states that light propagation is isotropic in all inertial frames of reference according to the equations (……). However, Smoot et al. have observed, that radiation coming from the direction of constellation of LEO is blue shifted, whereas radiation coming from the opposite direction is red shifted. Putting the measured shifts into the Doppler shift equations yielded the absolute motion of our solar system to be approximately equal to 390km/s in the direction LEO. Hence, light propagation is anisotropic in our solar system. One of the above equations has thus been falsified by Smoot et al. This implies that the Lorentz transformations, which are the basis of special relativity, are not valid in our universe. Both theories – special and general relativity – have therefore been refuted. Marinov’s coupled mirrors experiment had yielded essentiallly the same result already in 1975.
Experiment with Ampere?s Law and the Current Element
James Keele
The reason that a finite length current element may legitimately be used in the mathematics of calculating forces and energy between current carrying wires is because the current carrying element has canceling stored energy in it. This fact is demonstrated by an experiment conducted by the author. This experiment measured the inductance of several different shaped single turn coils. The measured value of inductance was then compared to the value of inductance calculated employing the integral of Ampere?s Law. It was discovered that by adjusting the length of the current element a match between the measured and calculated inductance could be obtained for all the single turn coils. The inductance of the current element, itself, was then calculated using the integral of Ampere?s Law. The inductance of the length required for the match was found to be zero. There are mechanisms in the current element that give up energy to supply the energy stored in it so that the net stored energy is zero.
James Keele Website
Thought Transference – Humbug or Part of Physical Reality?
Jan Olof Jonson
Well aware of the fact that ‘thought transference’, usually called telepathy, with a slightly ridiculing tone, most widely is regarded as just humbug, nothing else, it’s really risky to try to deal with it using strictly physics terms. Well, since I myself recently happened to encounter that very phenomenon, with a 100% evidence, I feel a scientist’s need to explain it. Of course one could stick to theories of demons or spirits, but that seems not very fruitful. In ancient times it was believed, too, that demons or gods were personally moving the celestial bodies one was able to observe from Earth. One more fruitful way to explain the possibility of “thought transference” is to realize that all the signals we can perceive with our minds inevitably correspond to TV or radio signals, and such are usually generated by resonance circuits. It is also well known that at least analog resonance circuits also are able to receive and add an external signal to its own, known as feedback or mutual induction. The reason why scientists have thus far been unable of performing practical experiments is probably the huge mixture of signals of different frequencies and amplitudes, created by billions of ‘brain cells’. How could one e.g. be able to separate all the existing radio signals, if nor first the selective radio receiver had first been invented? A reference to an experimental study performed by a Lettish scientist in the 1940s is also being done.
The Theory of Relative Local Time vs. Special Relativity Theory
Dr. Janusz Dyonizy Laski
The extension of the idea of local time used on the Earth to the entire solar system is proposed. It is shown how the relative local time in the solar system depends on the observer velocity. The corresponding relative local velocity is defined. The product of such a velocity and a local time interval is required to provide the classical relative distance. Presented formulae for the planetary Local Time Theory (LTT) are compared to those of Special Relativity Theory (SRT). It is shown that the proper time for a moving object defined by Minkowski amounts to the geometrical mean of two local times for two objects moving with velocities of two different orientations. It is shown that in SRT the relative distance between two observers A and B moving with different velocities depends on, which one of two is formally considered as an observer. It is proposed to consider LTT as an alternative to SRT.
On Gravitational Belts in Atoms
Prof. Jaroslav G. Klyushin
In previous papers, toroidal models of electron and proton were proposed. Tangential velocities of the particles drawing electron torus surface are equal to light velocity c in free ether. Therefore, electron does not induce additional vortices in ether at least as a first approximation. Meridional velocity of the particles drawing proton are 1.42c. This explains why proton induces series of vortices in the proton surrounding ether. The local light velocities in the first 194 vortices decrease up to (…) and then increase up to (…) making steps. Nuclear 194 vortices have mass of proton and atomic 137 vortices have mass of electron. There exists a transition belt of 1836 vortices between 194 nuclear and 137 atomic lines. Local light velocity in these 1836 vortices is stable and equal to (…)/137 and their mass decreases from the proton mass to the electron mass. Such gravitational belts with decreasing mass are essential in multi-electronic atoms. In particular, they define quantity of electrons in hulls(sp?) and character of X-ray radiation.
On a Toroidal Model of the Neutron
Prof. Jaroslav G. Klyushin
In the author’s previous papers vortical models of electron and proton as a torus were proposed. Torus mass performs two rotational movements, in equatorial and meridional planes. Equatorial rotation defines electric charge and meridional rotation defines its spin. If the vectors of equatorial and meridional rotation constitute right triple, the particle posesses charge of one sign; if they constitute left triple, the opposite sign. The author’s other papers tried to clarify the concept of magnetic moment for electron and proton and its connection with generalized Maxwell equations. This paper investigates the same problems for the neutron
On the Connection Between Electricity and Gravity
Prof. Jaroslav G. Klyushin
Gauss and Weber proposed generalization of Coulomb?s law for the case of moving charges.Such interaction depends on relative velocities and accellerations of the charges. When Maxwell field approach was accepted by scientific community, Lorentz proposed his force formula which describes interaction between electric and magnetic fields induced in the space by a certain charge and another charge called test charge. Actually this formula describes interaction between these charges and depends on absolute velocities of the charges. It does not take into consideration charges? accelerations, and does not cover other force formulas proposed by Ampere, Whittaker and Gauss, although all of them were confirmed by experiment. A formula covering all mentioned ones and introducing some additional items was proposed by the author as a generalization of Maxwell?s equations and Lorenz force formula. The proposed report is devoted to analyses of gravidynamic force, which generalizes Newton?s gravitational law in the case of moving masses. It includes second, third, and fourth time derivatives.This paper is aka “On Gravidynamic Force”.
Neutron Construction
Prof. Jaroslav G. Klyushin
In papers and vortical models of electron and proton as a torus were proposed. Torus mass performs two movements: in equatorial and meridional planes. Equatorial rotation defines electric charge and meridional rotation its spin. If vectors of angular velocities in equatorial and meridional planes constitute right triple the particle possesses charge of one sign if they constitute left triple- the opposite one.In paper concept of magnetic moment of electron and proton and its connection with idea of magnetic charge in generalized Maxwell equations was investigated. This paper tries to clarify sense of all those concepts for neutron.
Grunbaum Did Not Solve Zeno’s Measure Paradox
Jeffrey Grupp
This paper discusses problems with Current Metaphysical Accounts of Matter and Space used by Scientists and Philosophers, and Arguments for Stenger’s Particle Reality… (more)
About Time: The Three Stages of Enlightenment: Concerning the Synchronization and Rate-Correction of Terrestial Clocks
Jim Hodges
Circa year 2000: a) One second is duration of 9,192,631,770 microwaves from caesium-133; b) Paris atomic clock sync. signals are isotropic wrt Non-Rotating Earth-Centred Frame; c) Clock rates slowed by speed wrt the NRECF, and increased by remoteness from Earth centre; d) To maintain synchronization, clocks higher than Paris are biased to run slower. Circa year 3000: a) Master clock in orbit on other side of Sun; b) ‘Arcadia ‘ sync. signals are isotropic wrt the Sun-Centred Frame; c) Clock rates are slowed by speed wrt SCF, and increased by remoteness from the Sun; d) To maintain synchronization, the Paris clock is biased to run faster to compensate for Earth gravity, and biased cyclically to run slower at noon and faster at midnight to compensate for Earth spin. Circa year 4000: a) Master clock at cosmic rest (370 km/s in the direction of Aquarius); b) ‘Elysium’ sync. signals are isotropic wrt the Cosmic Background Radiation Frame; c) Clock rates are slowed by speed wrt the CBRF, and increased by remoteness from Milky Way center; d) To maintain synchronization, the Paris clock is biased to run faster to compensate for Sun gravity, and biased cyclically to run slower in June and faster in December to compensate for Earth’s orbital speed.
A New SRT Based on the Higgs Field
Dr. John R. Warfield
The new theory of Special Relativity based upon the Higgs field has the following attributes: 1) There are different reference frames for objects in motion. Some objects are at rest with the flow or expansion of space [galaxies]. Other objects have a high speed relative to the flow of space [galactic jets]. 2) The theory hypothesizes that the Higgs field determines the ?value of mass? and the ?rate of time? for particles [objects] 3) The value of the Higgs field can be different for objects in those different reference frames. Thus, the ?value of mass? and the ?rate of time? can also be different for objects in those different reference frames. 4) The differences in the ?rates of time? and ?values of mass? for the particles [objects] in their different reference frames is then used to explain the same proven facts or proven observations as demonstrated by Einstein?s Theory of Special Relativity.This papers is aka “New Theory of Special Relativity based upon the Higgs Field”
New Theory of Flowing Space (an Alternative to Einstein?s GRT)
Dr. John R. Warfield
The new theory of flowing space asserts that:
1. The Universe expands by the creation of new space, possibly from another dimension. This causes some of the objects of the universe to recede from one other with inertial motion (geodesic motion).
2. Other objects of the universe move towards each other with the same type inertial or geodesic motion. Why then is space not disappearing [through matter] and returning to wherever it came from?
3. In this new theory, matter moves towards other matter not because space is curved but rather because space flows towards matter and disappears [through matter] as it moves into another dimension. This concept would be another symmetry of physics.
4. This idea is a new way of perceiving the concept of curved space-time. Space-time flows into the universe between the super-clusters of galaxies from another dimension. It then flows towards matter, then through matter and subsequently out of the universe and returns to wherever it came from. This new concept is then used to explain known observations and proven facts in both Special Relativity and General Relativity.
The Entrained Ether and GPS
John-Erik Persson
Starlight aberration and Michelson-Morley’s experiments (MMX) are considered to provide the most important information about the possible existence of an ether. However, logical weaknesses exist in both these methods. Fortunately, there exist alternative methods (based on one-way light propagation) that are useful. These methods indicate that the ether is entrained by the Earth’s translation but not by its rotation. This ether can be united with starlight aberration.This paper is aka “The Ether-Wind Problem and GPS”
Interpretation of Starlight Aberration
John-Erik Persson
Aberration of starlight can be interpreted in such a way that its unification with an entrained ether is possible. The entrained ether, described here, adapts to distribution of matter, and provides thereby a kind of relativity. This allows time and space to be autonomous, and not absurd. Since the ether suggested here is translated but not rotated by the Earth, a change of name is appropriate. This new ether is therefore called ‘generated’ instead of ‘entrained’.
Promoting Entrainment
John-Erik Persson
This article suggests a type of ether called ‘generated’ that is translated by the Earth, but not rotated, which explains why GPS needs compensation for Sagnac effect. This ether defines light velocity and provides reference for that velocity, but this ether cannot change orientation of the wavefront’s plane, which explains why this ether has the same starlight aberration as an absolute ether, and therefore cannot be ruled out by starlight aberration. Michelson-Morley’s failure is explained, and also why only first order effects of light’s velocity, not direction, can provide manifestations concerning the ether-wind problem.
Starlight Aberration and the Entrained Ether
John-Erik Persson
The relation between light and ether is described in such a way that an entrained ether has the same starlight aberration as an absolute ether. The Sagnac effect has demonstrated the existence of an ether in different experiments. In the GPS system the Sagnac effect demonstrates entrainment also.
The Origin of Our Universe as Interpreted by Model Mechanics
Ken H. Seto
A new model of our Universe, called Model Mechanics, has been formulated. The current state of our Universe as interpreted by Model Mechanics is as follows: Space is occupied by a stationary, structured and elastic light-conducting medium called the E-Matrix. A mass-bearing particle called the S-Particle is the only fundamental particle that exists in our Universe. The different absolute motions of the S-Particles in the E-Matrix gives rise to all the observed particles such as the electron and the different quarks. Also, the absolute motions of the S-Particles or S-Particle Systems give rise to all the forces and processes of Nature. 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 motion 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. In cosmology, Model Mechanics provides natural solutions to the following problematic cosmological observations:
1. The observed accelerated expansion of the far reached regions of the Universe disagrees with the predictions of current theories.
2. The observed rotational curves of galaxies disagree with the predictions of current theories.
3. The observed paths of travel of the spacecrafts Pioneer 10 and 11 disagree with the predictions of current theories.
4. The observable Universe appears to have a much larger horizon than it is allowed by its observed age. The GRT description of gravity gives rise to the observed flatness problem of the Universe.
The above Model Mechanical description of our current Universe leads to a new interpretation for the origin of our Universe. This paper gives detail description of this new interpretation.
A Fundamental Revolution In Science
Commander Lawrence S. Myers
Kant’s Nebular Hypothesis [i] of creation of the Earth and Solar System, the most fundamental assumption in science, has been false since its inception in 1755, and must be replaced by one that reflects the realities of what is observed in the Solar System. This paper presents a new theory of Accreation (‘creation by accretion’) to replace Kant’s fallacious and misleading hypothesis. Accreation is a descriptive term that accurately describes how comets (the only solid bodies known to enter the Solar System) are captured by the Sun’s gravity and form planets by a dual process of passive external accretion of mass (including solar energy) and dynamic internal expansion. These are the mechanisms of all planetary growth. In effect, Accreation is a perpetual universal recycling system that begins with supernova remnants (comets) captured by the Sun that become the nuclei and building blocks for new planets by gravitational accretion and amalgamation until they grow and expand into future suns and stars that eventually become supernovae and produce comets that continue the cycle in some distant galaxy or solar system. A new discovery also discloses that the algorithms used in processing geodetic data from Global Positioning System measurements were adjusted in 1993 to exclude data from sites showing anomalous height elevations. The data “zeroed out” is exactly the information needed to prove Earth?s diameter is increasing and thus refute the constant Earth diameter assumed by the fallacious Nebular Hypothesis.
Advances in Physical Knowledge Presented by the Author at NPA Meetings of the Past Decade
Dr. Ing. Martin Miller
The author has been an NPA member for about 15 years or so, and has, during that period of time, presented papers on physical topics in most of their conferences. The present paper is intended as a brief summary of the most important results of all previous papers that this author has presented in said conferences.
New Physics Based on Force-Free Circular Motion
Mitch Emery
Present-day theories of the Universe call for all kinds strange things to exist in order to maintain their viability. In fact, it seems the more we know about the Universe, the stranger it gets. Must all of this be so? Or could there just be a problem with the premise on which theories are built? According to Newton’s First Law, a body in motion tries to maintain a straight line of travel. There are no exceptions to the rule because it is thought to be an act of Nature. However, this paper argues that unrealized effects from circular motion point to the underlying cause of its tendency to move in a straight line. A phenomenon is then described by which circular motion is force-free by Nature, while space and time each remain separate and absolute entities. Ultimately, it is argued that the Universe can be explained more easily in terms of an appropriately defined force-free circular motion, and that it provides a key to a simple theory of everything.Note: Portions of this paper (enclosed in brackets) have been revised for the purpose of clarification.
New Physics Based on Force-Free Circular Motion
Flawed Assumptions in MMX Prevented Aether Detection
Neil E. Munch
This paper identifies at least three simple but critical flaws in assumptions that prevented meaningful results in the famous Michelson-Morley experiments.  Their inevitable results were followed by erroneous rejection of an optical aether.  In the absence of adequate control of such assumptions by the world of physics, those conclusions de-railed much of ‘modern’ physics progress for 120 years and fostered equally flawed programs, such as the Lorentz Length Contraction, to needlessly justify aether, of Einstein’s Special Relativity Theory to replace it.  If this paper is coorect, the conditions within the physics community that permitted the ‘lost century’ should be considered and remedied where possible.
Ten Reasons Why We Need to Continue Discussing Special Relativity’s Flaws
Neil E. Munch
The reasons for special relativity?s flaws, e.g., use of self-contradictory assumptions, are still not understood nor accepted. To the contrary, this author has encountered respected physicists who feel it?s acceptable to shift to assumptions contradicting the derivation assumptions. The resulting errors abound in special relativity, even though they are obvious to anyone who cares to look — such as its requirement for a moving length to both contract and lengthen at the same instant. As a result, the practical physics world has already bypassed relativity and thereby missed the interested conclusions found when assumptions are held constant. For example, Einstein?s ?train paradox? can be solved only with an aether, as in Doppler?s 1842 solution or Domina Spencer?s general system of coordinates and universal time. Once that solution is verified, we need to find the inappropriate conclusions that came from the flawed special relativity concepts. For example, neither light speeds nor speed of objects are limited to the currently perceived constant value of c — as supposed by SRT. In addition, we need to consider implications in electrodynamics as well as in astronomy and cosmology. Also, it may be worthwhile for a world-wide committee to evaluate (in a non-adversarial way) how things went so wrong and why relativity?s errors were not discovered or corrected over the past century.
Simple (but Critical) Flaws in Special Relativity Discussed in Everyday Language
Neil E. Munch
Special relativity’s flaws are directly traceable to inappropriate shifts in its basic assumptions. Detailed analyses of such flaws are listed in the references. It?s appropriate that such simple flaws and their implications be described here in ways understandable by anyone. For example, when its basis in the light wave equations [x] is held constant, we easily see that lengths in special relativity are the lengths of light travel; and times are the time of that light travel at light speed c. That seemingly small distinction means that lengths are not those chosen at random, nor can elapsed times of light travel be clock-times or clock-rates or the lifetime of twins — as supposed in special relativity. In another case, an inappropriate assumption of linearity hides the impossible need for lengths in special relativity to both shrink and expand at the same instant. Special relativity?s two principles — a) that light speed is constant relative to each of 2 frames moving apart at velocity v, and b) that observers on each of those two frames see the same view of the other frame — are shown to be self-contradictory. Such critical flaws provide adequate reason to reject special relativity. Special relativity?s space-time concepts are also impossible and can be rejected. Any basis of general relativity on special relativity can be seriously questioned. Conclusions from special relativity, such as the constancy of light speed or space-time concepts, or that objects cannot exceed light speed can likewise be rejected until proven otherwise
Some Questions Raised by the ‘Three Reference Frames’
Neil E. Munch
Light wave discontinuities, readily seen by graphically considering spherical waves from a single light source moving over two frames, are corrected only by replacing SRT’s two principles with a third frame (aether?) relative to which light speed is constant [1]. Universal time (i.e., that light passes at the same rate anywhere in the universe) also appears required. If so, observers at the light source and receiver (and any other place not on that 3rd frame) must see a variable speed of light energy transmission– but what is the nature of that transmission? Might we use light energy periodicities rather than light waves or quanta? If so, might there be a wide spectrum of frequencies corresponding to a wide spectrum of periodicities in light transmission. And how, then, are we to measure speed? and of what? and relative to what? If the nature of light speed is uncertain, how then are the ‘light wave equations’ to be written, e.g., how do we express the relationship between periodicity (frequency) and distance between light energy peaks (at each periodicity)? Looking back now, we see that Michelson-Morley experiment was an invalid instrument to measure that. It was also invalid in SRT because both its source and receiver were in the same frame, hence never would measure length contraction per SRT which expected such changes in the ‘moving’ frame. There are also valid questions regarding the use of light speed c in electrodynamics and in astronomy. All of which arise from the simple graphical rejection of non-aether concepts in optical-kinematics.
1. N. E. Munch, “Light Wave Discontinuities and their Solution”, Proceedings of the NPA, V2, N2, pp. 118-124 (2005).
On the “Acoustics” of Moving Bodies
Pal R. Molnar
In this paper the power of different models will be demonstrated by the acoustic version of two well-known experiments: the Michelson-Morley, and the Sagnac measures.
The End of 20th Century Physics
Pal R. Molnar
Among other things in this paper it will be demonstrated that all differential equations of electrodynamics and quantum mechanics are useless in expanding or deforming systems, like the Big-Bang cosmology. The Big-Bang cosmology is the basic concept, or rather the flagship of the modern materialistic and atheistic world picture. The believers of this world view think so, that they have a well-established ?enduring than the iron? scientific background. So we would like to inform them that there is no solid background, e. g. the genesis of elements in the first three minutes is not a better theory than the myth of six days creation in the bible. In our view, the science, and its physics, is not the collection of final truth, but only a tool, a method to improve our knowledge about the matter, the life, the men and his history, or the universe. This is not an easy, not a smooth and linear highway, but a winding path with ramifications and deadlocks. (There is no “King?s Way”!)
An Unexpected Source of Clean Energy
Dr. Paul E. Rowe
This paper includes reasons to suspect that vacuum is not a void, but rather a matrix of touching protons and unpaired electrons (possibly Bose-Einstein condensed hydrogen). Quotes are included from scientists, including Sir J.J. Thomson, that indicate hydrogen gas has been produced in and from vacuum. Quotes from Christiaan Huygens and James Clerk Maxwell demonstrate that their electromagnetic equations were developed assuming a matrix of touching material particles. Quotes from Albert Einstein indicate that in employing Maxwell’s equations, he was unknowingly assuming the presence of a material ether. The techniques for producing hydrogen from vacuum (the ether?) require the input of considerable energy. Conversion of hydrogen into the matrix (the ether?) would produce considerable energy. Could the energy produced in lightning storms be the result of conversion of hydrogen in the water of moist air into ether under high voltage electrical discharge?
The GPS and the Constant Velocity of Light
Dr. Paul Marmet
When the velocity of light is measured with the Global Positioning System (GPS), we find that it is (c-v) or (c+v), in which v is the rotation velocity of the Earth where the cities are located. We know that the Lorentz transformations and special relativity are unable to provide a realistic physical explanation of the behavior of matter and light. We show here that all these phenomena can be explained using Newton’s physics and mass-energy conservation, without space contraction or time dilation. We have seen previously (1) that the principle of mass-energy conservation requires that clocks run at a slower rate in a moving frame, and physical bodies become longer because of the increase of the Bohr radius. These results allow us to answer the question: With respect to what, does light travel? For example, when we move away at velocity v, from a source emitting light at velocity c, the relative motion of the radiation is observed from the Doppler shift. How can we explain logically that these photons “appear” to reach us at velocity c and not (c-v)? The conventional explanation relies on special relativity, but it implies an esoteric space-time distortion, which is not compatible with logic. This paper gives a physical explanation how the velocity of light is really (c-v) with respect to the observer, even if the observer’s tools always measure a velocity represented by the number c. We explain how this problem is crucial in the Global Positioning System (GPS) and in clocks synchronization. The Lorentz’ transformations become quite useless. This apparent constant velocity of light with respect to a moving frame is the most fascinating illusion in science.
Absolute Space, Absolute Time, & Absolute Motion
Peter F. Erickson
Absolute Space, Absolute Time, and Absolute Motion exist. These are shown to be facts through an investigation of the nature of infinitesimals. Knowledge of that nature also makes the irrational magnitudes within the unit comprehensible. The number line is shown to be cognitively superior to set theory; furthermore, non-Euclidean geometry is shown to be a mere manipulation of symbols and not an expression of a ?parallel universe?. Inside, the reader will also learn about a hitherto unknown number system locked within the square root of negative one. He will also discover in the infinitesimal calculus a hidden key to a level of reality beneath that of nano-technology. The foundation of science is not some vague generality, but the exercise of reason as originating from the human sensorium. There is no difference between mathematical and ordinary inductive reasoning. The paper is the first chapter of the book, Absolute Space, Absolute Time, & Absolute Motion.
Gordian Knots in Physics
Dr. Peter Marquardt
Twentieth century physics is burdened by unnecessary pitfalls, and owes many of its troubles to unclear or false definitions, inconsistent modeling, untenable assumptions, neglected conditions, carelessly applied mathematics, careless simplifications (gedanken experiments), misunderstood experimental results, improper philosophical implications, etc. These artificial Gordian Knots must be cut before we may get back to the tremendous task of finding out a bit more about Nature. If analyzed correctly, famous experimental results do not support untenable theories that claim their fame from them. Physics blossoms when provided with a solid basis that does not have to be sacrificed if a defective theory gets into difficulties. Nature presents us with real Gordian Knots galore that have to be solved in an ingenious way. Some prominent examples will be explored.
Light Waves as a Many-Particle Phenomenon
Dr. Peter Marquardt
Light possesses an independent existence while in transit from a source to its point of arrival. Waves and quantization are the consequence of many particles coherently forming rigid crystalline arrays. The mathematics of the Newton particle flux theory and of the wave in a medium theory for light are isomorphous. Both are valid for interacting particle ensembles only. The loss of interference below a critical intensity threshold proves the emission of photon bunches. Single photons are never involved nor observed in any experiment, the photoelectrical effect included. Single particles do not make waves. The Maxwell field theory, while yielding mathematical answers in agreement with some observations, cannot provide a physical basis for the existence of light.
The Fundamental Sciences on the Way To Unity
Prof. Philipp M. Kanarev
It is known that physics and chemistry are the leaders among the fundamental sciences. The state of their unity was described most vividly by G. Wheeler, the American scientist, in this article “The Quantum and the Universe”, which was published in the collection “Astrophysics, quanta and relativity theory” (M.: Mir, 1982). He recorded a conversation between the valedictorians, physicists and chemists, which demonstrates a dead state of disunity of the fundamental sciences, and obliges us to think about its reasons. Now, world science is in the state of a breakthrough in understanding the unity of the microworld; that is why there is every reason to predict a movement of scientific thought in this direction.
A Particle Explanation of the Michelson-Morley and Kennedy-Thorndike Experiments
Randy Reukauf
What would happen if two particles went through the interferometer of the Michelson-Morley experiment? If the particles left the source simultaneously with the same velocity, would they arrive at the detector at the same time? If the interferometer was changed to the interferometer of the Kennedy-Thorndike experiment, would there always be a constant difference in time between the particles at the detector? The answers are yes if the particles are ideal and move according to Newton?s Laws of Motion. If the particles are ideal, Newton?s Laws of Motion allow the derivation of equations that predict the outcome of a collision. These equations, when applied to the movement of the particles through the interferometer, produce results that agree with the outcomes of the above experiments. As these experiments originally used light, these results allow the possibility that the experiments can be explained by the particle nature of light. The conclusion is that the particle nature of light needs closer investigation.
The Special Theory of Reality (updated/revised)
Robert F. Beck
My paper is based on extracts from my book (ebook and paperback ? see of the same title with further clarifications that will appear in my second book to be published soon. They are thus of an informal nature, but written primarily for the scientific community. My theory stems from a logical analysis of the true meaning and nature of the concepts of time, energy, space and mass. This is approached in a quite similar way to Einstein, with thought experiments, but I conclude that Einstein was wrong in his assumption that mass increases with speed, and that for radiation, the reverse is true; and that the constancy of c and time dilation have simple explanations without paradox when time is understood correctly as no more than relative spin. I also conclude that relativity is universally misinterpreted now because energy has to be relative and thus a property of matter as opposed to a separate entity, and because dimensions do not change. It is rather that considering them to change is a useful way of describing curved or relative motion. They thus describe the rotation of the universe and the galaxy, which are components of all orbits and either in part or in whole, are responsible for the illusion of expansion. But at the smallest level, such curvature of motion in neutrinos, which gives helicity, together with the understanding of a basic component of mass dependent on spin, give a clear and simple view of mass/energy equivalence, quantum general relativity, and the current notion of curled up extra dimensions. This leads to an explanation for the very nature of quantum mechanics and aspects of string theory in a way that offers clear visualization of the structure and behavior of particles, forces and radiation, all based on rings and spirals of neutrinos (or possibly even smaller particles). For string theorists this means the unthinkable: strings are made of particles! For gravity, the emission of gravitons in the form of spirals of neutrinos, quite similar to the emission of photons, provides a mechanism to confirm and explain Newton’s inverse square law. This means that singularities are impossible and that black holes are self-regulating and quite probably the source of BMR. Explanations for star, galaxy and solar system formation are suggested. One very important aspect of my findings and related research is that antigravity has to be possible, which has huge implications for climate change and the energy crisis. This work is supported by experimental and observational evidence related to twisted light, the gravitational effects of eclipses, WMAP, SOHO, the relativistic heavy ion collider at Brookhaven, the Hutchison effect, records of human levitation and by computer simulation.
The Special Theory of Reality (updated/revised)
Evidence of the Greatest Crime Ever Against Humanity?
Robert F. Beck
 Technology that could have prevented climate change has been potentially available for half a century, but has deliberately been suppressed for reasons that are no longer valid and represent self-interest that globally is criminally negligent. Such action, if continued in the light of these now apparent consequences, would amount to the greatest ever crime against humanity, and of course, arguably, maybe the greatest ever sin.  This report sets out the evidence that I have recently become aware of and my own particular reasons for considering the possibility of its validity.
Evidence of the Greatest Crime Ever Against Humanity?
A Philosophic Matrix Approach to Problem Solving
Dr. Robert J. Heaston
An axiomatic general theory of knowledge, or epistemology, was developed in the 1960s and presented at international philosophy conferences. One particular presentation was at the 14th International Congress of Philosophy in Vienna, Austria in 1968, which hosted a reunion of the Vienna Circle of logical positivism. My approach, which is called matrix philosophy, is a form of propositional calculus involving surrogate concepts rather than symbols. This approach was used as a basis of a dissertation on The Philosophic Limits of Political Choice that was selected in June 1975 as one of the top-three independent research papers for the school year of 1974-1975 at the National War College in Washington, DC. Later the theory was adapted as a practical general problem-solving model to use in a PERT-like ?Management Experiment? to oversee all conventional weapons science and technology in the Office of the Secretary of Defense from 1983 to 1987. The objective of this talk is to describe the epistemology, the matrix approach, the problem-solving model and the lessons learned.
Number Crunching the Large and Small Magnitudes of Physics
Dr. Robert J. Heaston
Physics needs very large and very small numbers. Whether called fundamental constants, coupling constants, cosmic numbers, or number coincidences, these numbers almost seem to have magical and even mystical characteristics, especially when considered from an anthropomorphic perspective. Many scientists have been baffled by the prolific existence of certain numbers that clutter physics. Three examples will be given a physical explanation for the first time: the Dirac large number hypothesis, the Eddington number, and the ubiquitous occurrence of 10-39. The paper will conclude with a model that resolves most of the mysterious number coincidences.
Origami and the Redefinition of the Four Fundamental Forces
Dr. Robert J. Heaston
It is possible to generate a log force versus log distance plot to scale by folding a piece of paper a la the Japanese art of origami. No measuring device is needed and any piece of paper may be used. The edges of the paper, the creases, and the intersections of the creases map mathematical equations. The origami approach has a number of distinct features. Results are visually displayed. Assumptions must be stated with each fold. The scale is automatically defined by the folding. Derivations are always bounded. The connectivity of relationships is guaranteed. Some concepts are more easily demonstrated by this origami process than any other way: redefinition of the four fundamental forces; convergence of different forces on the Planck scale and the superforce; identification of different number coincidences; and the unexpected relationship between the gravitational force and the experimentally measured strong/color force. Conditions will be defined where the origami is identical with a Lagrangian over the world in the standard model. The talk will proceed step-by-step through the origami folding process.
Emotions and the Logarithmic Sensing of Time
Dr. Robert J. Heaston
The objective of this paper is to justify the discovery that people sense time logarithmically. Several different observations support this discovery. The intensities of the senses of touch, hearing, sight, and taste are all based upon logarithmic functions. In particular, the sensing of time can be expressed in a mathematical equation called the feeling formula, which is similar in form to the Weber-Fechner Law discussed in psychology. Human emotions consistently correlate with the feeling formula. Freud was one step away from deriving this formula in his book Beyond the Pleasure Principle. Emphasis will be on the physics aspects of the human sensing of time. Experiments may be performed to verify this discovery, which would be a major breakthrough in understanding human physiology and behavior.
The Constant Gravitation Potential of Light: Part 1)Theory; Part 2)Physical Aspects
Dr. Robert J. Heaston & Dr. Peter Marquardt
In NPA 2004, Heaston reported on a theoretical derivation of a gravitational potential of (…) and called it the constant gravitational potential of light and radiant energy. This derivation was a part of a more general theme on ?The Characterization of Gravitational Collapse as a Mass-Energy Phase Change?. At the same conference, Marquardt talked about ?The Potential of Potentials: Old News from a Time-Honored Concept?, and mentioned the ubiquitous background occurrence of the  (…) potential. It is now possible to show that the constant gravitation potential of light is an unexpected consequence of the theoretical derivation of the Einstein field equations of gravitation starting with the Newton law of gravitation. Recognition that (…) is specifically associated with the gravitation potential of light changes the interpretations of a number of theories in physics. For example, a singularity is theoretically impossible. This paper will be presented in two parts: Part 1 focusing on the theory (Heaston) and Part 2 emphasizing the physical meaning (Marquardt).
Experimental Evidence that the Density of the Universe Is Not Constant
Prof. Roger A. Rydin
The primary assumption of the Big Bang model is that the universe is homogeneous and isotropic, and hence the density of the universe is constant everywhere. A secondary assumption is that the expansion of the Universe has no fixed center. Both assumptions are contradicted by voluminous experimental evidence. Independent analyses place the center of the universe at about a hundred fifty million light years from the Milky Way. General graphical analysis of the Sloan Survey indicates that the spatial density of galaxies, taken as a surrogate measure of the density of matter in the universe, drops from this center in an approximate 1-over-r-squared pattern. Furthermore, analysis of the Deep Galactic Pencil Surveys indicates that a radial ~450 million light year periodic variation is superimposed on this pattern. The same pattern exists for Quasars and other artifacts.
Radiation Reaction Refutes Relativity
Sadanand S. Savarkar
An experiment involving radiation reaction is proposed wherein, with the uniquely determined Lorentz-covariant radiation damping-force, the experiment provides for the detection of the absolute uniform rectilinear inertial motion of the System from purely internal operations and observations, and therewith falsifies the Principle of Relativity. This could be avoided only with the rejection of at least some one imperative requirement of the Special Relativity Theory. This rejection of an imperative requirement of Lorentz-invariance must necessarily lead to a similar experimental detection of the absolute uniform rectilinear motion of the System in some other situation, and this would again falsify the Principle of Relativity. Thus, in any case the Principle of Relativity cannot survive. As the existence of radiation back-reaction is theoretically necessary and experimentally established, the Principle of Relativity is proved to be not viable and not tenable, and stands refuted conclusively.
A Probabilistic Model of the Universe
Salomon Borensztejn
The probabilistic scientific model of the Universe proposes to reject the concept of determinism or causality, with the profit of the concept of chance, defined as a concept of probability with a universe of chance without causality. Far from being a factor of chaos or disorder, the chance is a factor of order and organization of the phenomena, on every scale. By its application, the theory of probabilities allows, a predictability of the phenomena. The probabilistic scientific theory of universe is against the anthropic principle and proposes that the concepts and the physical or biological theories of the universe (gravitation, quantum physics, constitution and evolution of organisms, etc…) are the phenomenological expression of the subjacent probabilistic structure of the universe. It proposes a new approach of the gravitation where the empty physical space, is filled with a field of gravitons, a source of the temporalist gravitation with finished range (Chapter 9). This model explains the anomalous radial acceleration of Pioneer 10 and the Casimir effect. The first consequence of the probabilistic model of the universe is the refutation of the expansion of the universe and all that is attached to it (Big Bang, inflation, etc…). Other concepts, like the asymmetry and the specificity of time are proposed with a quantum constant To = 4.5546*1017 seconds (approximately 14.43 billion years), the value and the interpretation of the constant of Hubble Ho (67.71 Km/sec/Mpc), theoretically established in 1962, the disappearance of the ‘age’ of the universe, etc… The last data given by WMAP (February 2003) made it possible to fix the value of the constant Ho of Hubble at 68 Km/sec/Mpc what well confirms the temporalist value of Ho is 67.71 Km/sec/Mpc. The temporalist model proposes an interpretation of the origin of the dark matter. In the field of biological sciences, the scientific probabilistic model of the universe proposes a new interpretation of the biological evolution and of the natural selection, without finality, which integrates the Darwinian theory: A probabilistic model of the biological evolution: with 3 probabilistic examples of the biological evolution: 1) 5 mass extinctions (with the causes of the death of the Dinosaurs at border K/T), 2) the hominization 3) the increase of the PO2 PAL. The probabilistic model of the universe proposes a certain number of criteria as observable facts (Einstein) or falsifiability (Popper). The model of the universe without expansion and the probabilistic model of biological evolution are integrated within the general framework of a probabilistic model of the universe where the chance, defined as a factor of probability, is proposed as the underlying factor of the order and the organization of all the phenomena, physical, biological, etc…, on all the scales:
Towards a Theory of Everything Integrating Known Physical and Invisible Virtual Universe
Satya Pal Asija
This paper, which is a continuation of the paper I presented last year at the NPA conference at Univ. of Connecticut, Storrs , 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.
On Classical Physics without Relativity
Dr. Sergey N. Arteha
The report is devoted to the critical analysis of some aspects of the relativity theory (RT). The logical and physical inconsistency of RT can be shown on the basis of some paradoxes, such as the modified twins paradox, paradox of antipodes etc (see RT can hide contradictions in the case of two points moving along one straight line only, but it appears inconsistent for more than two objects, or for a three-dimensional movement even for two objects moving on crossed straight lines. The classical approach separates an object under investigation from other Universe. Newton introduced classical notions of kinematics to determine registration points and standards independent on process under investigation (the base for uniform description of various phenomena, for joining of different areas of knowledge and simplification of the description). The relativistic equation of charge movement with the Lorentz force is simply reduced to Newton’s 2nd law. There are neither physical nor mathematical bases to claim, as if Lorentz transformations (received for emptiness) determine all properties in the Universe. Even the analysis of invariance of Maxwell equations shows, that the hypothesis about application of Lorentz transformations to all the physical phenomena is groundless. The analysis of modern electrodynamics also shows, that it cannot be considered as principally strict theory (but only as approximate one). The ultimate conclusion of work consists in necessity of return to the classical concepts of space, time and interpretation of the phenomena on the basis of a classical paradigm.
Experimental Detection of the Ether
Prof. Stephan J. G. Gift
This paper revisits the once-important subject of the luminiferous ether, and presents what we believe is a compelling empirical case to reestablish this medium as a viable physical construct. We first review the historical background leading up to the unsuccessful search for ether drift arising from the movement of Earth in its approximately uniform motion around its Sun. Following this, the failure of the Michelson-Morley and Kennedy-Thorndike second-order ether-drift detection experiments is explained by the experimentally established Fitzgerald-Lorentz-Larmour contractions. Two well-known first-order experiments are then presented and it is shown that the associated optical phenomena represent detection of ether drift occurring as a result of the revolving Earth. The analysis of these two experiments is done in the framework of an absolute space, and takes the Fitzgerald-Lorentz-Larmour contractions fully into account. Our results (along with the considerable data that accumulated up to the end of the 19th century) provide direct experimental confirmation of the existence of the luminiferous ether-the great dream of Michelson and Morley – and completely invalidate Einstein?s Special Relativity Theory.
Anentropic Thermodynamics
Stewart Ian Wells
A brief review of the status of the second law of thermodynamics examines the possibility of overcoming the notorious ?information? deficit that invalidates the famous ?Szilard Engine?. A simple mechanical arrangement is described which enables a recursive, self-regulating cycle to occur in a cylinder of rarified gas without additional information input. Although theoretical, the design is also notably more practicable than previous attempts.
Galileo Revisited: a True Test of General Relativity
Stewart Ian Wells
A brief discussion of some of the theoretical and experimental difficulties with the general theory of relativity is presented in the context of traditional methodology. In particular, it is noted that the principle experiments for general relativity fail to test its underlying ?Principle of Equivalence?. A simple adaptation of the falling body experiment is proposed, in which electric charge is involved, to determine the truth or falsity of the equivalence principle.
Methodology in Physical Science
Stewart Ian Wells
A critique of the methodology of physics compares the modern “analytical” method with the older ?synthetic? method, with reference to the distinction between the respective schools of geometry. The synthetic approach is recommended as an alternative for the future of physics, and parallels are drawn to the Socratic method and to detective science. The discussion includes some historical literary references, and is supplemented with two exhibits.
The Unification of Forces
Dr. Vladimir B. Ginzburg
We made an attempt to unify strong, superstrong (color), electric and gravitational forces. A proof is provided that when the electric charges of the interacting elements are assumed to be distributed along circles, the strong, superstrong (color), and gravitational forces can be explained by applying Coulomb?s law for electric charges.
Trouton-Noble Revisited
Prof. William L. Hughes
In the well known experiment proposed by Fitzgerald and performed by Trouton and Noble, it was assumed that the magnetic field generated between charged capacitor plates moving in a parallel direction would add to the total energy of the system. If the plates were hung on a torsionless suspension, the minimum energy principle was then supposed to cause the plates to turn such the plates were more perpendicular to the direction of motion. In this analysis using retarded potentials, it is shown that the total energy actually decreases slightly. Thus if any movement occurred at all, it would be to make the plates turn towards, now away, from the direction of motion, thus bringing Fitzgerald?s basic concept into question.
Michelson-Morley, Trouton-Noble, Kennedy-Thorndike, and the Fitzgerald-Lorentz Contraction
Prof. William L. Hughes
In the late 19th century, G.F. Fitzgerald and H.A. Lorentz independently suggested that the null result of the MM experiment would occur if the transverse arm contracted when it was rotated to become the longitudinal arm. Simultaneously, of course, the longitudinal arm would have to expand as it rotated to become the transverse arm, although this detail is seldom if ever mentioned. The two arms would then interchange, roles leaving the final fringe pattern unchanged. In a paper presented by this author in absentia at the 2005 NPA meeting, a case was made that the Fitzgerald-Lorentz Contraction (FLC) was derivable (for simple shapes at least) from conventional electromagnetic retarded potential theory in a Maxwell-Newton world, without the need to invoke the Special Theory Of Relativity (SRT). While that certainly didn?t invalidate SRT, it did indicate that SRT was perhaps not needed to explain MM. That analysis strongly suggests that the time differences of clocks going around the world in different directions is possibly explainable in a strictly classical Maxwell-Newton world, again without the need to invoke relativistic considerations. It is also suggested in a companion paper in this meeting that the Trouton-Noble results may not be a particularly solid basis for justifying SRT either, a result also shown in a highly sensitive experiment some years ago by Hayden. Finally, it is suggested that a more definitive experiment to validate or invalidate FLC might be a modification and refinement of the Kennedy-Thorndike experiment taking advantage of the velocity of the solar system through the cosmos.
Michelson-Morley Revisited, or Can the Michelson-Morley Be Real?
Prof. William L. Hughes
This paper is an update of the Storrs 2005 paper of same title.  It provides an electromagnetic analysis indicating that the much-touted null result of the Michelson-Morley experiment is perfectly reasonable from Maxwell-Newton classical considerations, without the need to invoke the special theory of relativity.  The anaysis also provides an alternative classical explanation for clocks going around the world in different directions running at different times, again without the need to consider relativistic theory.  It suggests that reexamination of other classical experiments, such as Trouten-Noble and Kennedy-Thorndike, may be in order.
The Essence of Special Relativity and its Influence on Science, Philosophy and Society
Prof. Zifeng Li
Also Published in:

  • Scientific Inquiry, 2007, 8(2): 229-236.
  • Science, 2007, (19):1-3. (in simplified Chinese)
  • Scientific Research Monthly, 2005, (13):80-83. (in traditional Chinese)

This paper studies the current status of special relativity in science and philosophy as well as society, and reasons for special relativity to achieve its fame, and presents three academic viewpoints, four public attitudes, comments of known scientists on special relativity, and lists periodicals, scientific meetings, and networks studying questions on special relativity. We summarize various arguments about special relativity, analyze the logic mistakes contained in special relativity, and investigate the authenticities of validations and applications of special relativity.  Our study indicates that the essence of special relativity is an incorrect logical consequence from the idealist standpoint and analyzes the harms special relativity has placed on science, philosophy, and society. We advocate the materialistic way of seeking truth based on facts and the publication policy that hundreds of flowers blossom and hundreds of schools of thought contend in order to liberate scientific research from the imprisonment of special relativity. The views of space-time and mass-energy of idealistic special relativity should be abandoned and the views of space-time and mass-energy of materialism should be restored and developed.

The Essence of Special Relativity and its Influence on Science, Philosophy and Society