Archive for March, 2015

FAPP c Property of the Poincare / de Broglie / Vigier Photon

Fully agreed, CERN’s motivation is always to ask for more billions. I was always told by a place like UC Swansea that it had never had money, and that I had to cover computing costs myself (Auto Two). I fought them to a standstill on that one until they finally admitted that computing was covered by the College after all. I was reprimanded for using too much postage in attempting to send out preprint requests. They suddenly spent £104,000 on an early notebook by Dylan Thomas. Admittedly Thomas wrote some good stuff, later in his life, but could not afford the price of a stamp. This notebook covers “Altarwise by Owl Light”, which I have unravelled on this blog. It is deliberately dense and ultra ultra obscure, and the young Thomas was playing around with his readers. Only in his later years does he become a good poet, for example “Over Sir John’s Hill”. I have asked people in Swansea whether they have read anything by Dylan Thomas, and the answer is almost always “no”. In the same way CERN is producing incredible obscurity at vast expense to al of us, while they pay no taxes themselves. So not very good stuff. The difference is that CERN is very well paid, Thomas was almost always as poor as it is possible to be. With this kind of society, who needs chaos?

Sent: 31/03/2015 13:42:23 GMT Daylight Time
Subj: Re: The Rest Mass of the Photon

Same here, I do not understand why they are not asking some of these simple and basic questions themselves. They seem to have created an unreal world where obstacles encountered are “fixed” by introducing more adjustable parameters and more abstraction.

Then again, we have only just started realising some of these things ourselves. There is more clarity with each new advance thanks to you and Horst. Out of the mist a little more of our world emerges.

Sent from Samsung Mobile

312(1): A Simple Calculation of Moving Photon Mass

This simple calculation uses the Beer Lambert law in combination with the Planck distribution for massive photons of monochromatic frequency omega. In the free photon gas the moving mass is 1.02 ten power minus 38 kilograms, compared with the rest mass m0 of 7.39 ten power minus 53 kilograms from the lowest known electromagnetci frequency of 0.01 Hz. This means that the photon is moving very close to c, but not at c. The Poincare / de Broglie / Vigier School referred to this as “FAPP c” (for all practical purposes c). Upon absorption by a low absorber such as glass of assumed refractive index 1.5 the moving mass is 8.53 ten power minus 53 kilograms, with a velocity of 1.5 ten power eight metres per second, half that of light because n = c / v. This is a simple calculation, and for that reason greatly preferred to a calculation with any number of adjustables costing billions and studying noise. There are no adjustables in this calculation, it uses fundamental theory. In future notes for UFT312 the Evans / Morris shift will be considered and worked in to this calculation.


The Rest Mass of the Photon

I should think that they are just encountering noise again, and there is nothing there. In Poincare’s theory the photon is just like any other relativistic particle of energy E = gamma m0 c squared and momentum p = gamma m0 v. Here gamma is the Lorentz factor gamma = (1 – (v / c) squared) power minus half. So when v = 0, E = m0 c squared and p = m0 v. Louis de Broglie equated E = h bar omega and p = h bar kappa to the above. Using the lowest known frequency of 0.01 Hz the photon rest mass is easily calculated to be about ten power minus fifty one kilograms. This is a fixed constant. The photon moves very close to c in almost all known experiments, so the moving mass m is increased by many orders of magnitude. The UFT papers summarized in UFT310 record the moving mass gamma m0. In all those papers the photon moves very close to c, but not quite at c. The claims by CERN simply make no sense to me. They do not look like science at all.

Sent: 31/03/2015 11:29:42 GMT Daylight Time
Subj: Re: Major Problems for CERN

Your statement below is important:

“I calculate that the photon rest mass is far too small to be measured by the Stefan Boltzmann law, with the instrumental precision we have now”

This may explain why results from CERN suggest a photon mass 26 orders of magnitude too large. Out of the noise, using their sophisticated equipment and multiple adjustable parameters, perhaps they are seeing something. It cannot be a Higgs boson as claimed though – that can then decay into two photons. Photon mass cannot be this large. There would be no electromagnetic spectrum from the ultra violet down with a photon rest mass of this magnitude.

Sent from Samsung Mobile

Many Thanks to Axel Westrenius

As in UFT310 one can plausibly think of the missing mass as being made up of moving photons with intrinsic mass m = gamma m0, where m0 is the photon rest mass. I was introduced to this subject by Prof. Jean Pierre Vigier, who worked with Prof. Louis de Broglie for many years at the Institut Henri Poincare in Paris. Prof. Henri Poincare introduced the idea of photon mass in July 1905.

Sent: 30/03/2015 23:47:25 GMT Daylight Time
Subj: Galaxy clusters collide; dark matter still a mystery, eh.., illusion?

Major Problems for CERN

This is a very good summary by Dr. Gareth Evans. CERN faces major problems in that its unified field theory has been entirely refuted. Among the main refutations are those listed as follows.

1) Its SU(2) sector has been entirely refuted in UFT225, using computer algebra to check the calculations. This paper has been read a few thousand times without a single objection off and was sent to CERN. It has been unable or unwilling to reply in about three years, and tried to cover up the paper.
2) The B(3) field refutes its U(1) sector, which depends on zero photon mass. This has been known since 1992.
3) Its SU(3) sector is under heavy international criticism for wild over use of adjustables. ECE introduces an entirely new theory of the weak and strong nuclear forces unified with electromagnetism and gravitation.
4) In general there are far too many adjustables for a meaningful theory of science. This is a fatal weakness of the old physics – the standard model. It is nearly meaningless because of these adjustables and unknowables, quantities that cannot be measured experimentally, violating the basics of natural philosophy.
5) CERN does not usually deal with gravitation, and is behind ECE in this respect, and the Einsteinian theory of gravitation is entirely incorrect. It has been replaced by ECE theory at no cost to the taxpayer.
6) CERN’s claims to have detected a Higgs boson are very controversial, and being met with deep scepticism by that part of the international community of scientists not involved with CERN, and with no conflict of interest. The Nobel Prize seems to have been awarded to justify continued funding. It was obviously pushed through and awarded in error. So the Royal Swedish Academy is coming under sustained criticism for ignoring genuinely new work.
7) The existence of photon mass entirely refutes the main idea of the Higgs mechanism, that initially massless particles acquire mass. It has become celar that there are no initially massless particles.
8) UFT311 provides definitive evidence for a generally covariant electrodynamics, and refutes the U(1) sector as well as providing excellent agreement between theory and experiment, confirmng the existence of energy from the ECE vacuum using a generally covariant unified field theory far simpler and much more powerful than the failed standard model – ECE theory. There is a feeling that a tiny and ageing establishment is leaning over backwards not to recognize ECE theory.
9) Many other criticisms and refutations.

Sent: 31/03/2015 09:36:58 GMT Daylight Time
Subj: Re: Discussion of Plans for UFT312, Nonsensical Photon Mass from CERN

The Higgs boson results in a rest photon mass 26 orders of magnitude too heavy and in the uv (and even though it is actually set to zero in the Standard Model).

So, there should be no visible spectrum, no infrared, no microwaves, no radiowaves. Hence, modern communications are not possible, there are no visible colours, there is no photosynthesis and there can be no life on earth.

The Standard Model has resulted in wasted money (billions of dollars) and wasted talent. Some great scientists are caught up in this mess, entrenched in the dogma and unable, or unwilling, to look outside the box.

The glaring mistakes are obvious to all when reduced to simple terms like this.

Well done Myron. Your conclusions in uft 225 are fully vindicated.

Sent from Samsung Mobile

Mathematics and Music

The Cartan geometry upon which ECE is based is very elegant, like Baroque music, but is difficult and abstract, like a triple fugue. However it has been reduced to the vector notation of electrical engineers in papers of the UFT series, and the results are summarized in The Engineering Model, UFT303, collected together by Dr. Horst Eckardt. The latter and Doug Lindstrom are the scholars with the best knowledge of the mathematics ECE, and so have been able to apply it and develop it themselves in UFT292 to UFT299. There are probably a hundred thousand or more scientists and engineers with varying grasp of ECE theory, from complete knowledge to the general reader.

Sent: 30/03/2015 18:02:00 GMT Daylight Time
Subj: reply

Dear Dr. Evans,

Thank you for your reply.

Unfortunately it looks difficult to understand ECE theory.

I will try to read the paper of Dr. Eckardt and Dr. Lindstrom little by little.

During in University, I had been engaged in listening to Baroque and the Early music and making Vacuum-tube Amplifier to do it.

Exactly not studying physics and mathematics well.

That’s why it is difficult to understand ECE.

My dream is to change this world much beautiful just like as Baroque music world.

Only energy from space time could do it, I believe.


Osamu Ide

Daily Report Sunday 29/3/15

There were 2,426 hits from 433 distinct visits, main spiders from baidu, google, MSN, yandex, seznam and yahoo. Evans / Morris papers 479, Auto1 339, Auto2 152, F3(Sp) 328, Eckardt / Lindstrom papers 215, Principles of ECE Theory 194, Book of Scientometrics 191, Evans Equations 164 (numerous Spanish), UFT88 142, Engineering Model 127, CEFE 86, Englynion 68 (second book of poetry), Llais 57, Autobiography Sonnets 25 (first book of poetry) to date in March 2015. Privacy Foundation Denmark (internet freedom group) general; Lycoming College Pennsylvania UFT239; Advanced Institute for Space and Aeronautics Toulouse UFT146; University of Poitiers general; Institute of Nuclear Engineering and Science National Tsing Hua University Taiwan UFT80; Computer and Information Networking Center National Taiwan University UFT213; University of Cambridge Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics UFT142. Intense interest all sectors, updated usage file attached for March 2015.

Usage Statistics for

Summary Period: March 2015 – URL
Generated 30-Mar-2015 11:37 EDT