[General] ust hypotheses

[Hodge John]

Richard Gauthier“Unfortunately all of the “theories” that people have beenproposing here are “just hypotheses”. Not all.  The STOEexamined data te presented problems or as hoc explanations such as dark matterfor cosmology and quantum mechanics were considered. The result was a set ofpostulates (excluding the equivalence principle) with 2 constituents of theuniverse -hods and plenum. The model was tested and refined by many cosmologyproblems. The hypothesis made 3 predictions about the Pioneer Anomaly beforethe data was analyzed. It is still the best explanation of all 12 of theproblems of the Pioneer Anomaly (the annual and diurnal variation is verypoorly explained by the popular thermal explanation).  The next focus to QM was to address the Young’s experiment -THE problem for all QM models. The first step at a STOE calculation is found inhttps://www.academia.edu/7161621/Scalar_Potential_Model_of_photon_diffraction. Later modifications resulted in a proposal for a hypothesistest https://www.academia.edu/17116351/Diffraction_experiment_and_its_STOE_photon_simulation_program_rejects_wave_models_of_light. The test was done. The result rejected current models (wave)of light ad did not reject the hypothesis. Further, the model has in it a meansto falsify the model and a prediction for the result of a future test. Thismodel is very close to satisfying the full requirement of a theory that noother model of Young’s experiment does. This test is seen in the calculatedpatterns on the left side of the patterns of the various experiments in theabove paper.  I estimate the equipmentmust measure to 0.0001 lux (very expensive) and have a more powerful laser (atleast 10 mW). If the predictions were confirmed, this would be a confirmedtheory in QM. The issue for the NOL group is that experiment rejectsnearly all of the threads being discussed. Some of the discussion requires someexplanation as to how the STOE rejects the discussion.  The next thing for the STOE is to model “What is a Charge?And “What is the E field?” The structure of the electron is also must bedifferent than the discussions. One of the characteristics of the E field isthat variation has a velocity of c , not more and not less than clike photons. The STOE suggest the photon has the highest speed of matterbecause the hods of a photon travel with the minimum dimension presented to thedirection of travel. So it must be for the E field. The speed of plenum wavesare orders of magnitude faster than c. Therefore the E field is hodsemitted by charged particles in and inverse square property like light andgravity to get the 1/r dependence. But electrons and other matter dotravel less than c. Therefore, their structure most present a surface tothe direction of travel. That is all directions. That is, all proposed modelsmust have a something to do with the hods - perhaps an oscillation like adrumhead. The structure of charged particles is that they must be continuallyemitting and absorbing hods.   Richard I note your paperssuggest tests to confirm your model. But it seems these test don’t rejectcompeting hypothesis. Has there been progress in conducting these tests - Ihaven’t found a reference. How does your electron travel <<c.  Mathematicians are OK with a point (r=0). But physicallythis is unreasonable (1/0 is undefined). Indeed, I think that division is andundefined and illegal operation for physics. Any transformation (mapping) thatinvolves division by zero is not physical.  Hodge 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/pipermail/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/attachments/20151201/d2f527c1/attachment.htm>