Hi John,
>> You're just as guilty as those you accuse. I have presented a fully quantified alternative physics theory, which predicts exactly what you claim ought to be possible. > Not quite sure what I'm meant to be guilty of, this is the first I have heard of your theory. > But what good is a theory? I agree, especially when you don't read it. > What experimental evidence is it based on and how does it help us develop this tech? (don't answer too soon I'm going to take a quick look over your pdf's. (evil format btw) This theory is developed entirely from the known physical constants and data. It is induced, not deduced. This theory describes quantum structure, as opposed to quantum mechanics. Have you ever worked on a car as a teenager, particularly before engines were fitted with computers? You didn't have to be the engineer who designed the motor to understand how it worked and how to modify it. By being able to see the motor, take it apart, and reassemble it, one could gain an intuitive understanding of the mechanics. This made auto mechanics accessible to a greater audience. The Aether Physics Model is still in a very low state of evolution, but its practical results are already apparent. The fact that I can calculate all the 1s orbital electron energies from first principles is better than what quantum mechanics can do. Also, I can account for every known physical characteristic of quantum physics, including the fine structure constant, the subatomic particle g-factors, the nature of spin, the imaginary number, and other dimensional and dimensionless constants. Further, this model provides a quantifiable basis for exploring the relationship between mind and matter via the unit of conductance. So far, I have been invited to London and Memphis to present this model before an audience of qualified scientists. Dave
