It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The Quantum Luminiferous Aether Version Two. No Black Holes.
page: 4share:
a reply to: kwakakev
Your comments are starting to go in a direction that is not aligned with my intentions for this thread. For the heart of the theory, I am not interested in a pitch, nor patents. Some additional coding could certainly be done with the aim of increased accuracy, but for the present purposes I believe things are good there also.
Much of modern physics does not make any sense. It has infinities and contradictions within it that lead to a mental dissonance in our understanding of nature.
One goal of mine is and always has been to understand the universe we live in at the most basic level. Whenever the story of that world reached a dissonance I was quite disturbed by it. I would think about the issues until I achieved an understanding wherein everything made sense and was in agreement with all experimental data that I was aware of. I am at the point now where everything makes sense to me. The flow laws still have an ad hoc nature that indicates future improvement is possible, but even there they at least make sense. (The flow laws are not dissonant, they merely have some unexplained complexity hinting at an underlying simplicity that is not yet found.)
A problem is that I, like everyone, am a limited human being. There may be experiments I am unaware of that have results at odds with my modeling. Although I took great care, I could still have a math or logic error. That is one reason I wish to have others look at my work; to see if problems are found. If problems are found I can work to address them. Secondly, I wish to share my understanding with others, as others might also find my work interesting and they too may wish to move beyond the dissonance.
That is, this thread was intended to be about the science.
A third aspect of my work, which is also important, is that when we advance our knowledge of nature we can often advance our control of nature with great benefit to mankind. That is the topic of my next thread, which I just put up.
Your comments are starting to go in a direction that is not aligned with my intentions for this thread. For the heart of the theory, I am not interested in a pitch, nor patents. Some additional coding could certainly be done with the aim of increased accuracy, but for the present purposes I believe things are good there also.
Much of modern physics does not make any sense. It has infinities and contradictions within it that lead to a mental dissonance in our understanding of nature.
One goal of mine is and always has been to understand the universe we live in at the most basic level. Whenever the story of that world reached a dissonance I was quite disturbed by it. I would think about the issues until I achieved an understanding wherein everything made sense and was in agreement with all experimental data that I was aware of. I am at the point now where everything makes sense to me. The flow laws still have an ad hoc nature that indicates future improvement is possible, but even there they at least make sense. (The flow laws are not dissonant, they merely have some unexplained complexity hinting at an underlying simplicity that is not yet found.)
A problem is that I, like everyone, am a limited human being. There may be experiments I am unaware of that have results at odds with my modeling. Although I took great care, I could still have a math or logic error. That is one reason I wish to have others look at my work; to see if problems are found. If problems are found I can work to address them. Secondly, I wish to share my understanding with others, as others might also find my work interesting and they too may wish to move beyond the dissonance.
That is, this thread was intended to be about the science.
A third aspect of my work, which is also important, is that when we advance our knowledge of nature we can often advance our control of nature with great benefit to mankind. That is the topic of my next thread, which I just put up.
a reply to: delbertlarson
Well go with an open source approach to your coding. Do you have a github account or some other link to see where you are up to with the coding of your algorithms?
Well go with an open source approach to your coding. Do you have a github account or some other link to see where you are up to with the coding of your algorithms?
new topics
-
George Stephanopoulos and ABC agree to pay $15 million to settle Trump defamation suit
Mainstream News: 5 hours ago -
More Bad News for Labour and Rachel Reeves Stole Christmas from Working Families
Regional Politics: 11 hours ago