So, I read that anyone who comes up with a legitimate unified field theory would be remembered with Heisenberg and win the nobel prize. That, of course, is a bunch of hooey, and I'm going to explain that. But it did get me thinking, someone must have explained unified field theory, someone must have come up with a solution. That is, someone besides me. If they used my methodology, whether from me or developed some other way, that would be gratifying. If not, then I have written a book that means nothing, but does it really mean nothing? Before I answer that, it is worth debunking the whole concept of a unified field; except for my theory, which at best would be complex to carry out, of course.
In order for NLT to work, for any unified field theory to work, you need something more than clever mathematics or the ability to match one set of equations to another. In order for a unified field theory to have merit, you have to be able to convert matter or energy into gravity or you have to be able to go the other way.
That doesn't mean that it has to be easy or cheap. But to claim a unified field exists without the ability to convert between fields is denying the existence of unity.
You can't have a unified field theory just by having good math and saving the web site: http://unifiedtheoryofmatter.com/indexen.htm
This is an example of the over complicated analysis that makes no sense and is really little more than a compilation of the misdirected mathematics to date. Now I haven't even looked closely at UTOM very closely. I don't need to. If he was so smart, he'd be flying an anti-gravity machine about my house thumbing his nose at me.
Now you might be asking, do I think that I can build such a device? If I didn't I wouldn't be saying that I had a unified field theory. Now that being said, if you asked if I was building something like that, the answer would be no. In truth, it was too early for me to be thinking about that. The math isn't fully developed yet, it's a conceptual theory, that's all.
What makes me think that the UTOM is nonsense? The telltale sign is the use of nonsense particles that appears to be a symptom of all traditional physics theories.
Why? Because if you can come up with things like "higgs bosons" to give mass instead of a simple intuitive process then what you're really doing is coming up with is patches and calling them different particles with the necessary features to make it work, everything from gravity to mass to magic. And yes, magic particles is what they're doing, sorcerer's stones.
Just because you understand what time coordinates are and what it means when they change doesn't mean that you know how to change them.
However, Einstein did not know how to change matter to energy. He may have understood vaguely about radioactive materials, he may have understood that concentrations of these materials started chain reactions, but there was no certainty.
So now it falls on me to determine how the change of concentrations, an alterations of coordinates can be effectuated to lead to a conversion of gravity to non-linearity. A complete elimination of the initial manifestation of non-linearity while still affecting a linear universe. This sounds incredibly difficult because it would involve the elimination of space.
When I thought that black holes were non-linear time, it seemed like the secret lay there. When black holes became CT5 instead, it became clear that the answer lay in the other direction and hence the elimination of gravity involves the elimination of space. That is possible, but we don't see it because non-linearity is coordinates not changing and that is invisible to us. But at least I know what it is.
So traditional physicists and UTOM especially, keep making up particles, keep thinking you're on to something. If anyone creates an anti-gravity device, it will be using Non-linear time, irregardless of what your website says.
An equally technical description comes from other examinations of these theories. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_field_theory
This article is more accurate, merely saying it hasn't been solved and the reason is that these other attempts are doomed to be clever failures is that they remain mired in an outdated view of the universe.
http://www.answers.com/Q/Has_the_unified_field_theory_been_solved
It became a question to me, who would I submit a unified field theory to? Well, these guys have: reviewed this type of theory: American Mathematical Society and the European Mathematical Society in the Zentralblatt fur Mathematik? Many others come to mind, but I'm not sure that I know where I should start. Perhaps the right answer is that I shouldn't look for anyone, I should wait for them to come to me.
Or perhaps it is a horror movie. I have to build the machine to make time non-linear, something that would make space disappear. Perhaps that is how it works.
http://www.awitness.org/unified/pages/new_physics2.html
Or maybe I should go through social networking? Who can say.
https://www.linkedin.com/groups/Trans-Dimensional-Unified-Field-Theory-1931832/about?goback=%2Egmp_1931832%2Egfl_1931832%2Egna_1931832
But let's talk about something different. Yes, Non linear time theory has its penumbra of potential brilliance, whether its real or not remains to be seen. Yes it adds certain nightmarish zen to the universe. But what is this book (formatted to 150 pages) about non-linear time theory. It is really about a new theory of quantum mechanics? Or is it possible that the entire project, the creation of this new way of looking at the universe is actually something else? Is it just possible that something as involved and in this whole undertaking and if so what is it? What is all that stuff in the posts leading up to the theory of non-linear time theory? Am i mad, obsessed, or is is something more basic? And why go through this much trouble when it would be so simple to do something else? Why do some people solve things that are not complex, and others just make them worse? And what does this have to do with the question at hand?
What do people say is the most powerful force in the universe, that is those people who know nothing about physics?
Ok there is that. Is it all a function of some predestined universe, the result of a god who enjoys toying with the occupants? One who enjoys those who would presuppose they had some control in the face of so many facts indicating just the opposite? Or is it something more human? What is the meaning of all the innuendo and who would solve the problems of the universe for no reason other than what is suggested by that?
Or perhaps it is not something as Machiavellian as that, that is too weird even for me. Perhaps it is just about physics.
No comments:
Post a Comment