Baconian Methods in ECE Theory

Fully agreed, the home page list of experimental tests of ECE and ECE2, and advantages over the standard model, can be extended and brought up to date. This is Baconian science of course, designed to remove anthropomorphism from science by comparison with experimental data. One important and definitive proof of ECE is UFT311 and UFT364, and there are many others. I should draw up an updated list. In the meantime I encourage Michael Jackson to continuously post all relevant papers and books he thinks fit on any medium he choses, including wikipedia. This process can go on for years. Wikipedia is similar to “1984” or “Animal Farm” by George Orwell. I wanted to illustrate the fact that it is an automated censorship machine. No one actually reads changes to the defamation and crude personal abuse, a computer is programmed to remove the changes. Moderators are not used at all. This is a criminal offence as well as a tort. Reform of the law is needed to allow prosecution of wikipedia for verbal common assault (openly abusing scientists by using terms such as “crackpot”) and of course, libel. Society should not allow wikipedia to do this. Wikipedia and the hate blog can be sued for libel and defamation on the following grounds:

1) The sites expose the plaintiff to ridicule.
2) The sites wrongfully attack the integrity of the plaintiff.
3) The sites attack the plaintiff’s financial well being in that they aim to make the plaintiff unemployable and aim to prevent funding of the plaintiff’s work.
4) The sites wrongfully and maliciously state that the plaintiff suffers from a mental defect.

The defendant has a defence against libel if he can prove honest opinion, or can prove that he is telling the truth. The opinion by wikipedia is not honest, it is demonstrably false because it uses the term “crackpot”, wrongfully suggesting mental illness. It attacks the integrity of the plaintiff by insinuation, by trying to give the impression that Cartan geometry is incorrect. It attacks the plaintiff’s well being by trying to prevent funding or hiring. The hate blog is de facto defamatory, and anyone who cites this defamation is also defammatory. The hate blog has made threats and that is a criminal offence.

No competent scientist takes any notice of wikipedia when it comes to ECE, or the hate blog. Only a complete and malicious fool would read a hate blog. One could ask why bother to sue them? The answer is that malicious attacks on innocent people can be very damaging. Sueing for libel is very expensive and must be done in High Court. If the plaintiff loses he faces having to pay out expenses unless he has insurance. So it is best to ignore wikipedia as I advised initially, and as Horst advises now, and at the same time post all our items there. If they are all automatically removed by a computer, wikipedia is finished, they can be posted in any number of other places, adn all staff should be doing this all the time in my opinion, in order to increase awareness of ECE and ECE2 from an already very high level. It is part of the work of AIAS / UPTEC. Our sites outpower wikipedia in many ways.

cc M. P. Gower,
Prime Minister’s Office

To: EMyrone@aol.com
Sent: 31/12/2016 14:44:07 GMT Standard Time
Subj: Re: Wikipedia Censorship

Obviously Wikipedia removes changes in some unwanted articles automatically. I think fighting against wind mills like Don Quixote is futile. We should rather concentrate on experimental proofs of effects that are predicted by ECE theory and cannot be explained classically. This will make the theory irrefutable. Energy from spacetime is such an effect, and the alternative propulsion mechanism in the paper sent over by Michael is another one. The Russians did significant work already.

Horst

Am 31.12.2016 um 09:42 schrieb EMyrone:

Many thanks again, and Happy New Year! Horst, The AIAS staff should look in to this paper. Feel free to go ahead and post any UFT paper on Wikipedia, and also published books such as “Principles of ECE”, and all the essays and poetry broadcasts, book of poetry and so on. In fact all our published books on ECE, because I own the copyright on them. I am sure that Lar Felker will give permission to post his book. These are all the equivalent of best sellers. The combined sites www.aias.us and www.upitec.org are archived on the wayback machine www.archive.org, so the date of publication can be found from the wayback machine. It also archives the blog in real time, but your back ups are still of key importance. Combined sites will soon be archived and featured as sites of importance by all the British and Irish copyright libraries using wayback machine software. It is very important to realize that Wikipedia has no authority of any kind, it is just a private company, and its blank, hideously offensive censorship has no place in science or a democratic society. It brands innocent and distinguished people at will, and tries to stop them defending themselves. It therefore violates the U. S. Constitution’s protection of free speech, and violates human rights. It has just censored a reference to UFT89, which has been read thousands of times without objection for a decade. This is the rebuttal of the long forgotten early pseudocritics. So Wikipedia is washed up and finished when it comes to ECE, it is just a tired propaganda outlet of an old physics riddled with errors. You have been nominated for five gold and five silver medals of the British Institute of Physics along with the rest of the team, the team certainly deserves recognition. From referrals feedback analysis I see that Wikipedia is finished when it comes to ECE, it faded away entirely about two years ago after a long decline. You could try to post key works on arXiv, but I think you will run in to the same kind of blank censorhip. Wikipedia’s rules means that it cannot censor published books. The censorship is automated and mindless because we are using standard geometry, used without a problem by everyone else. The so called “criticism” was analyzed very carefully by AIAS / UPITEC and found to be outright fraud in several instances. Bruhn was guilty of fraudulent misrepresentation of Cartan geometry. You might recall that Lakhtakia was caught sending hate email using pseudonyms. He should have been sacked but Penn State was too weak to deal with him except for a mild reprimand, apparently by the Campus Police at University Park. Lakhtakia slammed down the telephone on me on two occasions when I objected. Bruhn collapsed and disappeared in about 2008 and was medically advised to withdraw. Rodrigues is well known to have delivered savage diatribes to several people, but little or no science. Wikipedia ignores all progress made by AIAS / UPITEC, and still quotes those people in the teeth of overwhelming international acceptance of ECE theory. It is completely corrupt and biased when it comes to ECE because it has chosen moderators who “reek with egregious malice” in the words of Alwyn van der Merwe. All the papers “censored” by ‘t Hooft are now classics, notably UFT 1 to 15. I would classify wikipedia as a troll site when it comes to ECE, and therefore in violation of the common law. It could be prosecuted. Finally, if you have trouble downloading any UFT paper I can send you a copy by e mail. In fact I have already sent you copies of all of them over the years, and also all the books. This is easier than downloading off the sites.

In a message dated 30/12/2016 20:23:41 GMT Standard Time, writes:

Hello Dr Evans,

I just looked at the Wikipedia entry for ECE Theory, and they must have already deleted your edits: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einstein%E2%80%93Cartan%E2%80%93Evans_theory

We certainly need to organize, and edit wikipedia on a continual basis. We especially need to have pdf papers, which explain the trivial semantic objections of Rodrigues, T’hooft, and Bruhn. By

linking to our own arxiv.org papers, the rules of wikipedia will stop the trolls from deleting our rebuttals.

An exciting, new proof of ECE theory is contained on page five of the attached pdf. By forcing two gyroscopes to precess against each other, a non-newtonian
thrust is created, which is used by Boeing aboard the International Space Station!
Quote: “Recently the existence of this technology has been confirmed by a Boeing
engineer, Mike Gamble, who has been working at Boeing since 1985. He stated at the
2015 COFE conference that Boeing uses a similar device to maintain

orientation and
stability aboard the International Space Station (Gamble, 2015; Manning, 2015; Valone,
2015). Gamble is quoted as saying that Boeing uses a “scissoring gyroscope” mechanism
to harness forced precession of the gyroscopes, which are then used to adjust the
orientation and motion of the space station. He said there are four gyros on board to do
this. He even remarked that the device has been in use for long enough that one of the
four gyros had worn out and had to be replaced recently.”

The Eric Laithwaite gyroscope videos are really amazing, and prove a loss of mass, and loss of inertia: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LRYFIeU4Pcg

There is an archive service, where you can archive any web page you wish. This way, you don’t have to wait for quarterly archives: http://archive.is/

But, keep in mind, an archive is just a snapshot of a webpage, so creating pdf archives is still the best way to preserve the information.

It is very important to archive your blog, so I plan to send you the pdf after January 1st, so the entire year is covered by one pdf.

I had another concern about your UFT papers – you should put a publication date on each one. Soon, it will be irresistable for scientists to plagiarize your work, and if you don’t have

a date on the papers, there will be an argument, as to who made the discovery first. Also, a revision table should be used for subsequent corrections, just like a government document.

Without publication dates, the only way to prove the release date is to search the blog pdf archives. But, it is doubtful that will serve as proof to the plagiarist.

Another thing I have found about the UFT papers – it takes DAYS to download them all, so it is very doubtful that busy academics will take the time to download more than a few. Why not create

zipped archives of the UFT papers, so they could download a few big files, and have them automatically unzip on their own hard drive? I’ve found that the aias.us server will limit the number of

UFT papers that can be downloaded in one day (maybe 30 papers is the limit), so the student has to wait a day, and try again tomorrow. NOT a good way to disseminate these important papers!

Just like the corrupted rebuttal pdf papers, the download limit shows scientific interest may be much larger than presently known!

Let’s make 2017 a new beginning for many things, especially ECE Theory!

Michael Jackson

On Fri, Dec 30, 2016 at 3:47 AM, <EMyrone> wrote:

I have edited the ECE article on wikipedia to point out that it is an obsolete distortion. This is easy to do, log in to wikipedia and edit the article. I suggest that all AIAS and UPITEC Fellows add their comments on the wikipedia article to demonstrate their own contributions. If wikipedia does not allow fair dialogue, and allows defamation, it will have no credibility. There are essentially no referrals now from this crude defamation by Wikipedia. On past experience wikipedia deletes comments that its so called “moderators” to not like. Its attempted character destruction has failed. ECE has made a huge worldwide impact.

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: