--- Harry Veeder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > THE QUANTUM RING THEORY > > Quantum Ring Theory: Foundations for Cold Fusion. > http://www.bauuinstitute.com/Publishing/QuantumBook.html > > In Quantum Ring Theory Wladimir Guglinski presents a > radical new > theory concerning the fundamental nature of physics. > Hailed as a > intriguing theorist by Dr. Eugene Mallove, president > of the New > Energy Foundation, Guglinski argues that the current > understanding > of physics does not put forth an accurate > understanding of the > world. Instead, Guglinski argues that we must once > again consider > the "aether," a notion originally put forth by Greek > philosophers. > By considering the nature of "aether" and its role > in physical > processes, Guglinski is able to put forth a theory > that reconciles > Quantum Physics with the Theory of Relativity. To > date, no other > physical theory is able to accord for the > fundamental intraction > between these two fundamental notions of physics. As > part of > Guglinski's new theory, the author presents a new > model of the > neutron. Guglinski's model of the neutron has been > confirmed by > contemporary physical experiments: The first one was > made by Don > Borghi and published in 1993 by the American > Institute of Physics; > the second experiment was made by Elio Conte and > Maria Pieralice, > subsequently published in the magazine Infinite > Energy in 1999. > Currently, other experiments around the world are > being conducted to > test the remainder of Guglinski's theoretical work. > > Quantum Ring Theory presents for the first time in a > complete text > the theoretical work of Wladimir Guglinski. In this > volume cutting > edge theoretical work in physics is presented; > theoretical work > which may ultimately change the very way we > understand the world. > >
Hi Harry, That's very interesting. IMHO the days of QM are coming to a close. IMHO the future of physics will be in replacing paper written equations with computer simulations & algorithms, and replacing terminology such as "energy exchange" with highly detailed step-by-step processes. IMHO that's the future of physics. For example a guy from NASA contacted me about my magnetic theory regarding MCE. Although he agrees on half my theory, the other half he cannot confirm. For example, he refers to it as simply an "energy exchange." It's a nice terminology and indeed it looks pretty to see a little wiggly photon moving from one atom to the next, but in real life it's just not that simple. We cannot write such a simple equation if we want to clearly understand in detail what's happening. Truth is no single particle can absorb 100% of any electromagnetic wave. The nearest atom might absorb 12% of the energy, the next atom absorbs a far less amount, etc. Mathematically we cannot associate a single frequency with a single photon. This concept of trying to make the photon a single quantum object and quantum wave is limiting. For example, consider the following, It is possible that what QM refers to uncertainty is simply caused by minute particle-waves so-called dancing around at rates far beyond the detection of present instruments. Consider a hot pan slightly tilted. Allow a drop of water to fall on the hot pan. We see the water dancing and hopping all over the place, but slowly the hopping water makes its way down the slanted pan. People a few hundred years ago could not predict exactly where the water would hop from one location to the next. Although they could indeed derive an equation based on probability of predicting when the drop would reach a certain distance down the tilted pan. Lets say the equation stated that in 3 seconds there is a 90% probability the water will reach the 5" mark. So these people could say it's impossible to predict the water within any accuracy beyond the equations. Yet, given today's high speed digital cameras and computers we can conceivably calculate where the drop will hop from location to location over time if we analyze the pan in extreme detail, take live thermal shots of the pan and water, etc. Two hundred years ago such certainty would seem like magic. The suggestion is QM has placed limitations. Sure, the probabilities and uncertainty has given humanity the ability to predict, and such predictions are better than nothing, but the science community should not rigidly believe in the uncertainty principle. To even suggest such a thought in the science community is offensive. It's my hope we can all be a little open-minded and have some foresight. That's why I give scientists such as Dr. Michio Kaku two thumbs up! :-) I have a highly untested theory in its infancy called MMT that's based on defining all things with respect to magnetic moment. It seems hopeful and would like to post it here one day. IMHO it will be the computer to clearly demonstrates the proper method of viewing the universe is by understanding all things are connected, that the concept of particles are different than we thought. MMT shows how to view the universe and that it's not confusing to understand that the particle is both a wave and a particle at the same time, always. The single electron double slit experiment and single photon double slit experiment has and is shaking the science community. Regards, Paul Lowrance __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
