Letter to an Aspiring Progressive Physicist


as you linked from worldnpa.org and am very interested in some of your assumptions.  I have a paper just put into Progress in Physics and some of my conclusions are the same as yours.  The url is http://www.ptep-online.com/index_files/2013/PP-32-04.PDF In a nutshell where I will be going from here is showing that while Guv can represent the wave, (Omega guv-Luv) is from the viewpoint of the medium (and should be more mathematically rigorous).  Any comments or advice are most welcome.

Jeff Baugher


Glad to see that you are into progressive physics and that you found our site. We do seem to be using some of the same assumptions. I think that you will enjoy reading "The Scientific Worldview" (Chapter 3 is most of "The Ten Assumptions of Science") to see where things are going in the non-silly part of the world. Next, you will want to read "Universal Cycle Theory,” which covers much of the stuff you are concerned with in your paper. The free downloads on our website ( www.scientificphilosophy.com ) also should give a hint about where we are coming from. The E=mc2 paper and the "Einstein's most important philosophical error" paper should be of special interest.

Sorry to bust your balloon, but in your paper, you mention three predictions that supposedly established the validity of Einstein’s Field Equation: 1) magnitudes of gravitational lensing, 2) gravitational redshift, and 3) account for Mercury’s precessing orbit.

Although generally ignored by the mainstream, these observations said to support Einstein have alternative explanations more in tune with "The Ten Assumptions of Science”:

Gravitational lensing was put to rest by Dowdye (2010, 2011), who showed that the Eddington observations that made Einstein famous were due to refraction produced by the Sun’s corona. Thus, at 2R from the center of the Sun, Einstein predicted that light bending would be 1/4 (i.e., 1/R2) as much as it was just above the surface of the Sun. Modern instruments show that there is none. Thus light is unaffected by gravitation and there is no curved empty space-time as was predicted by Einstein.

We explained the gravitational redshift in "Universal Cycle Theory" (Puetz and Borchardt, 2011; Borchardt and Puetz, 2012) as the result of increases in light velocity produced by increases in aether density as a function of distance from massive objects.

The explanation of “Mercury’s precessing orbit” was done nicely by Rydin (2011) without calling upon relativity.

I hope you get a chance to read the suggested works. With the correct beginning assumptions, we can put physics back on track. With your great mathematical ability, I am sure that you will continue to be on the cutting edge.


Borchardt, Glenn, and Puetz, S.J., 2012, Neomechanical gravitation theory ( http://www.worldsci.org/pdf/abstracts/abstracts_6529.pdf ), in Volk, Greg, Proceedings of the Natural Philosophy Alliance, 19th Conference of the NPA, 25-28 July: Albuquerque, NM, Natural Philosophy Alliance, Mt. Airy, MD, v. 9, p. 53-58.

Dowdye, E.H., Jr., 2010, Findings convincingly show no direct interaction between gravitation and electromagnetism in empty vacuum space ( http://www.extinctionshift.com/SignificantFindings.htm ), in Volk, G., Proceedings of the Natural Philosophy Alliance, 17th Conference of the NPA, 23-26 June, 2010: Long Beach, CA, Natural Philosophy Alliance, Mt. Airy, MD, v. 7, p. 131-136.

Dowdye, E.H., Jr., 2011, Gravitational Lensing in Empty Vacuum Space Does NOT Take Place ( http://www.worldsci.org/pdf/abstracts/abstracts_5973.pdf ), in Volk, G., Proceedings of the Natural Philosophy Alliance, 18th Conference of the NPA, 6-9 July, 2011: College Park, MD, Natural Philosophy Alliance, Mt. Airy, MD, v. 8, p. 176-182.

Puetz, S.J., and Borchardt, Glenn, 2011, Universal cycle theory: Neomechanics of the hierarchically infinite universe: Denver, Outskirts Press ( www.universalcycletheory.com ), 626 p.

Rydin, R.A., 2011, The Theory of Mercury's Anomalous Precession ( http://www.worldsci.org/pdf/abstracts/abstracts_6066.pdf ), in Volk, G., Proceedings of the Natural Philosophy Alliance, 18th Conference of the NPA, 6-9 July, 2011: College Park, MD, Natural Philosophy Alliance, Mt. Airy, MD, v. 8, p. 501-506.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Thanks so much for your comment. Be sure to hit "Preview" to see if it will publish correctly. Then hit "Publish". Include your email address if you wish to receive copies of your comment as well as all other published comments to this Blog.

For those having trouble getting this comment section to work:

Nitecruzr writes:

[FAQ] Why can't people post comments on my blog?

The Blogger / Google login status, and the ability to post comments, is sensitive to both cookie and script filters. Your readers may need to enable (stop filtering) "third party cookies", in their browser and on their computer. The effects of the newly unavoidable CAPTCHA, and the Google "One account" login, requires third party cookies, even more than before.




Third party cookies filtering, in a browser setting, is the most common solution, overall - but your readers may have to search for other filter(s) that affect their use of Blogger / Google.

Any filters are subject to update, by the creator. If the problem started a few days ago, your readers may have to look on their computers, and find out what product or accessory was updated, a few days ago.