Video Interview

Dear Dr. Anderton,

My main e mail address is emyrone at aol dot com. Prof Amoroso had mentioned to me that I had been nominated a few times for a Nobel Prize for the B(3) field. The Einstein theory has been refuted in very many ways as described on www.aias.us and www.upitec.org and these refutations have been accepted internationally for well over a decade. See for example UFT88, 99, 109, 313 and 354, and the monographs: “The Principles of ECE” and “Criticisms of the Einstein Field Equation”, among numerous other refutations of the great Einstein theory of relativity. These are rigorously logical refutations that have generated intense interest in all the best universities, institutes and similar in the world for many years. There have been millions of readings of ECE theory, possible tens of millions. It is true that ECE and ECE2 are theories that emerged from the B(3) field, which was inferred at Cornell Theory Center in 1991 and published in 1992. In 1993 my co author and good friend, the late Jean-Pierre Vigier, recognized that B(3) means non zero photon mass. As you know Vigier dedicated his life work to photon mass, following Henri Poincare and Louis de Broglie.
There are very many problems with and errors in the Einstein theory. The main one is that it is based on entirely the wrong geometry. The Einstein Cartan Evans unified field theory is based on the correct Cartan geometry with torsion, and it seeks to forge a rigorously Baconian theory that gets away from dogma. Vigier was invited to work with Einstein at the Institute in Princeton. Neither would have had any problem in accepting Cartan geometry. Albert Einstein corresponded a lot with Elie Cartan, with obvious mutual respect. I have a feeling that Einstein would have had no problem with accepting ECE and ECE2. The problem is with dogma and habit in others.
Vigier always said that physics should be a dialogue between schools of thought. Judging from the famous ECE scientometrics I would say that the two main schools of thought in physics at present are ECE and standard model. The scientometrics show that ECE is going to be studied intensely for the foreseeable future in all the best places and by millions. It is also archived permanently on www.archive.org and www.webarchive.org.uk. So it will not be going away. Those who created it canrest assured of its permanence. I was pleased to be appointed a Civil List Pensioner in 2005 by Head of State, Prime Minister and Parliament. It is a higher honour than a Nobel Prize, because it is a State honour compared with an academic honour. It is much tougher to be appointed a Civil List Pensioner than to win a Nobel Prize. The latter is increasingly seen by the professionals as being devalued and subjective. For example Arnold Sommerfeld was nominated well over eighty times and never received the prize. Bertrand Russell was nominated once and received a prize. Several of Sommerfeld’s students and post docs won a Nobel Prize. We know this from the archives released by the Royal Swedish Academy about fifty years after the secret nominations. They are supposed to be secret but they are often leaked (for example my fellow nominee in Wales, the great poet R. S. Thomas).
I am a big fan of Einstein, it is just that things move on. I see no point in blocking thngs when everyone knows about them by just using google.

Cordially,
Myron Evans

To: EMyrone@aol.com
Sent: 23/09/2016 11:35:31 GMT Daylight Time
Subj: Re: unified field theory

Dear Prof Myron Evans

I think more in terms of videos, because it is more appealing to a larger Internet audience. Videos as a sort of initial introduction, with reference to then see the papers, links to websites etc. for more details.

Would it be possible to arrange a video interview with you?

I understand from Prof Amoroso (who runs Vigier Conferences) that natural progression from Prof Vigier would be to your theory, and that ideally you should have a Nobel prize.

But the problem is the Einstein fanclub- “they” don’t like anything bad said about relativity, and cause Blockage.

I think I have a way around that Blockage, as a PR exercise, things need rephrasing along lines that: Einstein was right about some things and wrong about other things. I need to however discuss this with you more fully.

Some idea of what I mean can be gleamed from some videos I would like to show you for private viewing; that I will eventually put on my website.

One video of Prof Amoroso saying about it is impolite to say Einstein is wrong.

Other video by Dr C Y Lo who has said a lot of times that Einstein is wrong, but re-phrases it in more detail about what he thinks Einstein is wrong about and what he thinks Einstein was right about, and how Einstein did the best he could in his time/era etc

If that is ok with you I can send the links. What it needs though is usually your main email address that Youtube/google will recognise.

Regards

Roger Anderton

On September 23, 2016 at 12:47 PM EMyrone@aol.com wrote:

This is a good initiative. We could syndicate items you like from www.aias.us , which I own.

MWE

In a message dated 23/09/2016 00:02:29 GMT Daylight Time, writes:

Dear Prof Myron Evans

I plan to set up a website on Unified field theory. would you like to contribute?

We communicated a long time back I pick up unified field theory from Boscovich.

regards

Roger Anderton

Advertisements
  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: