Quantum gravity physics based on facts, giving checkable predictions

Monday, September 26, 2005

Yesterday I made two further revisions uploads to http://nigelcook0.tripod.com/ . I've deleted some personal comments in the general relativity section, added external links, added an explanation of the general relativity prediction of twice the deflection of light that Newtonian gravity suggests, and added a section explaining the mathematics of the tensor (or six-vector) form of Maxwell equations.

I've also posted a message for EMS who believes he is doing a public service by suppressing science:

Dear EMS57,
In ignoring the gravity mechanism as verified experimentally, you should be aware of some interest in the spacetime fabric by Professor t'Hooft, sor example http://eskesthai.blogspot.com/2005/08/fifth-dimension-is-spacetime-fabric.html
There are various conflicting ideas about science progresses, due undoubtedly to the fact that it will progress by whatever means are necessary. For example, sometimes facts are ignored because they superficially do not appear to fit into existing models. However, it mey be that the popular interpretation of existing models is flawed.
The difficulty with suppressing a defensible viewpoint by simply refusing discussion (or claiming to disprove it by a bogus claim that 'logic' can prove the moon to be cheese), is that it does not stop progress from being made. Current teaching of general relativity, as causing a flat surface like a rubber sheet to curve into a manifold, is unhelpful to further progress in unifying quantum space with gravitation, since physical space fills volume, not surface area.
At some point, the issues regarding the relationship between the graviton gauge boson and the Higgs field boson will be completely ironed out. Regardless of when this happens, the correct mechanism is already available and allows calculation of the gravity strength, because this calculation does not depend on the details of the relationship between the graviton and the Higgs boson. It would be far better to allow some link to this research now since it makes quantitative predictions and gives a testable physical mechanism, despite its suppression by superstring theorists (led by Witten who vacuously claimed string theory 'predicts gravity' in the April 1996 issue of Physics Today). This is because this avenue of research would be undertaken more rapidly if a greater number of people were aware.
Yours sincerely, Nigel


Post a Comment

<< Home