When you are interested in physics you must read “Unbelievable“!
The physical perspectives of SRT and QM are seriously flawed because of these omissions. Although omissions are a common occurrence in all fields, deliberately ignoring them when discovered is unacceptable.
Attempts at publication, or even evaluation of the papers since 1998 have proven to be fruitless. It is clear that no valid arguments have been raised against them, but it appears impossible to have them published. They are dismissed for reasons that have nothing to do with science. The most prevalent argument (implicit or otherwise) is that theories already exist which provide “perfect” solutions for everything and there is no need to look for alternatives. Scientists are afraid to discuss these topics. Science has taken on the infallibility of religion and because of that scientists believe they are not accountable anymore. Only faith and obedience are required to practice physical science nowadays.
Technical progress over the last 100 years has been enormous. The mathematical solutions are stunning. The omissions however, distort the theoretical perspectives in such a way that the imagined physical process of nuclear fusion is seriously flawed. Scientists consider this to be impossible because the mathematics of QM accurately describe reality. In their “infallibility” physicists forget that there are in principle, infinite mathematical solutions for any observed data. Are the infinite solutions all absolute correct? A mathematical correct solution does not necessarily apply to a physical process, to think it does is a mistake, and to think the preferred mathematical solution describes the exact physical process is incompetent science; especially when these “absolute correct physical equations” already contain at least two very serious fundamental omissions.
After 6 years being denied answers on legitimate questions I have no choice than to address science disrespectfully, because it is possible that science through ignorance, incompetence and arrogance withholds society of nuclear fusion as a viable alternative.
The present perspective is a world where the scientific reality is even more fantastic than any known fairytale. Science proclaims the reality of relativity of time and space, unimaginable paradoxes to be true, parallel worlds to exist and more. If the omissions are addressed all this fictional “science” will disappear.
The arguments of physics journals not to publish the mentioned articles on basis of not being actual, prompted me to look for the link between traditional physics and QM. The paper “Quantum Mechanics and the Ether: The Derivation of Planck’s constant”, to be published in Galilean Electrodynamics (GED) in 2009, is the result. The previous papers are an integral part of this. GED is a so called dissident physics journal an d is completely ignored by mainstream scientists.
Again this paper was rejected by all other journals on basis of not being actual. This prompted me to add this chapter concerning incompetence to the website.
Comment added November 2007
The empirical significance of the QM-formulas is undisputable. The flaw of QM is that this science is theoretically incorrect, and that is also the reason why QM cannot explain sub-atomic physics with traditional physical concepts. The argument of scientists concerning this observation is that the sub-atomic (QM) physical reality obeys different physic laws not observable in our macro-world and therefore cannot be explained with traditional physics. This could be a valid argument but is not necessarily true.
The theoretical conclusions of QM are based on the physical entities of the derived particle formulas. The presumed physical entities of the QM-particles are false and therefore the theoretical conclusions based on this are too. Because the QM-formulas are based on invalid premises QM was directed on a false theoretical path. Science concludes incorrectly that traditional physics cannot explain sub-atomic physics.
The above mentioned article explains sub-atomic physics with traditional physical concepts. The derived sub-atomic physical processes are completely consistent with the experimental/mathematical findings of QM. The physical approach in the article uses valid traditional theoretical explanations for sub-atomic observations. This approach offers the unique possibility to eliminate the natural constant of Planck (h), explain the Fine Structure Constant and the observed energy quantification of atoms with old fashioned physics.
Theoretical physics, with RT and QM as “theories”, ends up with a physical “reality” of relativity of time and space, 7 to 12 (!) dimensions, parallel worlds, unexplainable contradictions etc.
Dragged ether theory on the other hand doesn’t imply any discrepancies, needs only 3 dimensions and eliminates the natural constant of Planck (h).
Which theory is favored by Occam’s razor?
When science journals would publish this article they would have to recognize that subatomic physics can be explained with traditional physical concepts. Furthermore they have to discuss the previous mentioned fundamental omissions. This appears to be impossible.
Expert scientists therefore prefer to ignore and be dishonest.
In the past 10 years I have sent many thousands of letters and emails to scientists, science journalists, editors etc to consider the possible unjust denial of ether. Theoretical evidence disqualifying Quantum Mechanics (QM) is however denied without any comment.
When Theoretical Physics ignores theoretical evidence the integrity of that science has been lost. When a Science discipline is corrupted correction of omissions has become impossible.
In the 21st century nuclear fusion, a clean and abundant source of energy, is desperately needed for viable environmental, economic and social developments in the near and distant future. The corrupted state of the science Theoretical Physics makes it impossible to investigate the scientific possibilities ether physics offers to achieve nuclear fusion as an alternative energy source.
A Fundamental Physics Experiment should be performed. The performance of this experiment is out of my reach. I hope some experimental physicists can realize this experiment and will be able to publish the results.
Physics journals and science journalists have a social task and obligation to inform about developments in their respective fields. It is my opinion that they do not live up to their professional and moral duty when they arbitrarily ignore articles without giving valid arguments. An editor cannot hide behind the anonymous referee, when that referee’s arguments are bogus. Their arguments to refuse publication of articles that reveal serious omissions, on the basis of being not topical or not relevant must be considered incompetent science and for that I “honor” these institutions and editors with their own place of incompetence on this website.
The correspondence with physics journals is available for everyone who wants to know.