Long Essays

May 15, 2018 by

Dr. Myron Evans

This is an excellent idea, and it would also be a good idea if the staff members could write papers like this giving their own views and perspectives. Horst Eckardt is currently writing a textbook which is certain to be another classic. Every staff member who can do so is invited to prepare articles and lectures on what they think are the most important advances made in seven hundred UFT papers and books since 2003. This is roughly the entire output of Linus Pauling for example, achieved over sixty or seventy years. Similarly the colleagues could write articles and broadcast lectures on what are the most important advances made in my career of almost two thousand items. That would take up their entire retirement (in humour). If they think that I have achieved nothing at all, it would be a very short article.
Intense Blog Interest in UFT406 and notes…

View original post 150 more words

black hole escape velocity?

May 15, 2018 by

Dr. Myron Evans

Since EGR has been refuted in so many ways, some of them ridiculously simple, this stuff is unscientific and should not be funded publicly. It is a school dinner composed of cabbage, prunes and custard, catalyzing regurgitation to pass exams. Thanks again to Stephen Crothers, whose work is highly recommended reading, for example his chapters in the classic “Principles of ECE” volumes one and two (blue box on the home page of www.aias.us).

Black hole escape velocity?
To:

Crothers, S.J., Black Hole Escape Velocity,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZbDLd42Uws

View original post

Wikipedia entry on Jean Pierre Vigier

May 15, 2018 by

Dr. Myron Evans

This is a grudging little entry that does no justice to Vigier, but reduces Wikipedia to a farce, because the first reference is to a book that I wrote in “The Enigmatic Photon” series. Vigier was a kind of honorary (and very encouraging) co author but I wrote them. Wikipedia passes off the book as Vigier’s book. It is clear that Wikipedia’s ugly little distortion of my work and biography has failed miserably and that it is itself in trouble. I for one would not be sad to see it taken off the internet, in many ways it is a vindictive rag. In all probability Bo Lehnert, King of Sweden Gold Medallist and Royal Swedish Academician, revealed to Richard Amoroso, chair of some Vigier Conferences, that I had been nominated for a Nobel Prize several times. Amoroso openly told me about them. The wiki thing and its associated and vicious…

View original post 109 more words

407(4): Development of the New Theory of Atoms

May 15, 2018 by

Dr. Myron Evans

All is OK here I think because only the expectation value < v squared> is actually used. This is worked out from < p squared / (2m)> . after working it out it is used inside the gamma factor. So the use of the wording “expectation value of gamma” should be avoided. agreed with the second point. The calculation needs the expectation value <1 / r > which you have worked out in previous papers. For n = 1 it is the Bohr radius. Agreed about the virial theorem. This is the first inroad to the relativistic theory. As usual some checking and development work will follow.
407(4): Development of the New Theory of Atoms
To: Myron Evans <myronevans123>

Can the expectation value (statistical average value) of gamma in eq.(16) be transferred to <v^2> ? This is not a linear transformation, and for any function f(v) we have

< f(v)…

View original post 220 more words

Second Method of Refutation of de Sitter Precession

May 15, 2018 by

Dr. Myron Evans

Second Method of Refutation of de Sitter Precession

In the third term of Eq. (1) it is the radius of the earth, better denoted r sub E for clarity. In the second term it is the electron proton distance. The expectation value of the third term is the term itself, because it is a macroscopic quantity. So this is worked out in the note.

What is the variable r in this note? In eq.(1) ist is the radius of the earth, but in (3) it seems to be the radius of the H atom. De Sitter precession is smaller than <U_C> in my earlier calculation.

Horst

Am 13.05.2018 um 15:20 schrieb Myron Evans:

Second Method of Refutation of de Sitter Precession

This is an improvement on Note 407(3) and shows that the de Sitter theory imparts an unquantized positive energy to the energy levels of the H atom. This is…

View original post 228 more words

407(4): Development of the New Theory of Atoms

May 15, 2018 by

Dr. Myron Evans

The major new insight is given by Eq. (1), which is developed into a relativistic theory. This gives several new insights on the non relativistic and relativistic levels. For example the energy levels of the Schroedinger H atom are the negative of the expectation values of the electronic kinetic energy in each orbital. The energy levels of the Sommerfeld atom are the Thomas precession per radian multiplied by the rest energy, m c squared. The force equation and spin connection are derived, and the expectation value of the Lorentz factor defined. The ordinary non relativistic kinetic energy is the Thomas half multiplied by the rest energy. So elements of relativistic theory combine to give a familiar non relativistic result. The Thomas half is obtained by spinning the ECE2 line element.

a407thpapernotes4.pdf

View original post

Trivial Refutation of the de Sitter Precession

May 15, 2018 by

Dr. Myron Evans

1) I first expressed the Coulomb potential (11) as U sub C = – alpha h bar c / r. Its expectation values are given by Eq. (15), <U sub C> = -(alpha / n) squared m c squared.
2) It follows that the gravitational potential is U sub g = 2mMG / r = 2 x alpha h bar c / r. its expectation value is <U sub g> = – 2 x <U sub C> = 2 x (alpha n) squared m c squared. The missing factor 2 has been reinstated here.
3) So the energy levels of the H atom are Eq. (21) with x replaced by 2 x. These are the energy levels in a gravitational field because the Thomas precession is replaced by a de Sitter precession in a gravitational field. This is of course the dogma of the standard model.
4) I worked out…

View original post 419 more words

UFT406 – a Milestone Paper

May 10, 2018 by

Dr. Myron Evans

The patterns of readings of all the work on www.aias.us, and in particular the UFT papers, begin to clarify after a few days at the start of the month. The webalizer file posted every morning gives the complete feedback, and the daily report the filtered feedback. The latter takes about four hours to prepare every early morning. So I am like a Parisian baker, getting the pattiserie ready. When I lived in Paris as a post grad., the morning air was filled with baguettes and croissants (autobiography volume two), and hyper strong coffee in small cups. I could see the Arc du Triomphe from the flat (loaned by my supervisor Claude Brot). UFT406 is already the leading paper for May 2018 followed closely by the replication paper UFT364 and the gyroscope paper UFT396, and a very long line of UFT papers in English and Castilian. It was another great…

View original post 165 more words

Note 407(1): Thomas Precession in Planetary Orbits and the H Atom Orbitals

May 10, 2018 by

Dr. Myron Evans

Many thanks to Dr Horst Eckardt for pointing out that Note 407(1) is a remarkable result that shows that the “non relativistic” solutions of the Schroedinger equation are inherently relativistic and that the gamma factor is obtained a priori from rotation of the ECE2 covariant line element. He also points out that the standard model uses the idea of the Lorentz boost as being purely linear. As shown in Note 407(2), the “Thomas half” comes out of the commutator of boost matrices. This is also a new development because usually, the commutator of boost generators of the Lorentz group is used to give rotation generators. That procedure does not make clear that the Thomas half is given by a commutator of boost matrices. The Schroedinger equation is the non relativistic limit of the ECE2 fermion equation (the ECE2 covariant development of the Dirac equation), so it is natural (in retrospect)…

View original post 579 more words

407(2): Thomas Precession from Commutator of Boosts

May 8, 2018 by

Dr. Myron Evans

This note shows that the commutator of ECE2 covariant boosts can be expressed entirely in terms of the Thomas precession. In view of the fact that EGR has been refuted completely and very simply in UFT406, the Thomas precession is the only correct theory of planetary precession. It was also shown in UFT406 that the experimental precession is essentially unknown. For the outer planets is is claimed in EGR that a millionth part of the observed precession is due to EGR, but it is very difficult to find this millionth part in the literature. It is not listed in Marion and Thornton. In ECE2 the Thomas precession is developed in a space with finite torsion and curvature. All that can be said now is that part of the obscure experimental claims of EGR is due to Thomas precession. In the previous Note 407(1) it was shown that the energy levels…

View original post 13 more words