Archive for September, 2008

High Honour

September 30, 2008


Subject: High Honour
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 12:35:06 EDT

This is a High Honour so is featured as can be seen above some Knights and a University such as Plymouth. So all my friends and colleagues over about forty years can share in this honour.

Glyn Eithrym

Armorial Bearings

September 30, 2008


Subject: Armorial Bearings
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 12:26:22 EDT

To Windsor Herald

Many thanks indeed. The finished arms look magnificent, and I am most grateful to the College of Arms for featuring them in the Newsletter. They can be placed on _www.aias.us_ (http://www.aias.us) and _www.atomicprecision.com_ (http://www.atomicprecision.com) now, and also on _www.steriwave.com_ (http://www.steriwave.com) . We are scheduled to arrive around 11.30 am on Monday 6th October and will be very pleased to meet you then for the formal presentation of the Letters Patent.

Glyn Eithrym

Dear Dr Evans,

I am forwarding the latest College newsletter which has just been issued.

Yours sincerely, William Hunt, Windsor

—– Original Message —–

Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2008 2:09 PM
Subject: FW: College of Arms Newsletter No 18 (September 2008)

Dear William,

Attached is the September newsletter for your client Mr Evans.

Peter

——————————————————————————–

Sent: 30 September 2008 08:26

Subject: College of Arms Newsletter No 18 (September 2008)

Dear friend of the College of Arms,

We are delighted to send you the 18th issue of the College of Arms electronic newsletter. It is intended to supplement our website (which will, of course, continue to be updated) in providing a detailed and informative view of the workings and activities of the College, together with relevant

current questions of heraldry, genealogy, public record keeping and historical research.

The Officers of Arms

——————————————————————————–

No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG – http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.173 / Virus Database: 270.7.5/1698 – Release
Date: 29/09/2008 19:25


Attachment: CoA Newsletter – No 018.pdf

Source of the Incorrectness of Standard Gravitational Physics

September 30, 2008


Subject: Source of the Incorrectness of Standard Gravitational Physics
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 07:36:31 EDT

This can be traced to the use of the symmetric connection. The idea of connection was intorduced by Christoffel in the nineteenth century, but the symmetric connection seems to have been developed by T. Levi-Civita, the co-founder with G. Ricci-Curbastro of tensor calculus in 1900 in:

“Methods de Calcul Differential Absolu et Leurs Applications”

This was the source used by Einstein, whose many errors in tensor calculus were corrected by Levi-Civita during 1915 to 1917. Therefore it is necessary to find the above document from a library or lending library and to se whether the connection used is symmetric. I am fluent in written French so can read it. If so, this would pinpoint the source of the present fiasco, in which the whole of cosmology and gravitational physics is being shown to be incorrect because of its use of this symmetric connection. There is a classic book by Levi-Civita:

“The Absolute Differential Calculus”

and there is a need to go through this to find whether Levi-Civita ever used anything different from a symmetric connection (i.e. zero torsion). If he did not then it shows why torsion has been incorrectly eliminated from gravitational theory, rendering it meaningless, and violating the dual identity.

Levi-Civita died in isolation in 1941 after having been ostracized by the scientific community because of his ethnic background. This may also have contributed to the fact that torsion was not properly taken account of. It is clear that Einstein never properly grasped the meaning of torsion in correspondence with Cartan. Now we know that torsion is central to all physics.

Generalized FLRW Metric

September 30, 2008


Subject: Generalized FLRW Metric
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 07:05:07 EDT

I have found one of these in a paper by Portugal in about 1995. It is:

ds squared = c squared dt squared – a dx squared – b dy squared – c dz squared

where:

a = t squared / (m – n ) squared

b = 1 / (t power 2(m +n) exp (2x))

c = exp (2x) / (t power (2 (m + n)))

Our code will again show this to be completely incorrect geometrically, again violating the dual identity of geometry. It may be worth trying out this one, but as Horst mentions, we are now able to shred any standard lien element like a production line.

So it is quite clear that the standard scientists amount to a small and obsolete group with cynical intentions on power and money. In our system it is up to the politicians to clean up this mess. The easiest way is to turn off the public funding.

The Dirac Metric

September 30, 2008


Subject: The Dirac Metric
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 06:46:50 EDT

This appears in Jeremy’s book, and Horst tested it against the dual identity. It was found to be a complete fiasco, not even obeying the Ricci cyclic (so called “first Bianchi identity”). I think we could also show this in paper 120. I don’t know what Dirac was trying to do here, I think it was also to do with the singularities. So this subject area is a mess, and I recommend students to go into other subject areas of physics, chemistry, engineering or similar, i.e. to do something useful for society. Do not swallow pronouncements as if they come from marble. I have never been impressed by reputation or the fact that someone works somewhere which is proclaimed to be terribly important.

PS typo

September 30, 2008


Subject: PS typo
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 06:38:47 EDT

Sections three and four

Planning Paper 120

September 30, 2008


Subject: Planning Paper 120
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 06:37:31 EDT

I suggest that I write the introduction and a section one, followed in section two by the computer algebraic criticism of the black hole and big bang metrics, followed in Section four by a combined criticism by Jeremy Dunning-Davies and Stephen Crothers of black hole and big bang ideas, citing papers by Schwarzschild, Einstein, Levi-Civita, Eddington, Dirac and Hoyle for example, making the paper into a review of criticism of big bang and black holes, and showing that the Einstein field equation itself is completely wrong, not just wrong, but completely wrong.

So called Schwarzschild contradicted by galactic dynamics

September 30, 2008


Subject: Paper 120 : So called Schwarzschild contradicted by galactic dynamics
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 06:16:14 EDT

As a result of paper 119 it can be seen that the misnamed Schwarzschild metric is severely contradicted by galactic dynamics, in which the orbit of the sun around the centre of the Milky Way is not described by the so called SM. Therefore the latter is in general incorrect. To describe galactic orbits one needs ECE theory as in paper 119. The field equation approach, rather than the geodesic approach, is needed. The geodesic approach is sufficient only for solar system dynamics, and even then there are Pioneer / Cassini anomalies. In binary pulsars, the geodesic approach begins to fail, and as shown in papers 108 and 111 the use of a symmetric metric becomes self contradictory. So in fact, there is no line element known that can self consistently describe all aspects of cosmology. There is no point in waffling around with “dark matter”. The only known self consistent description of cosmology is the ECE field equation description. Standard physics is obsolete, self-inconsistent, and a total failure.

Refusal of Hawking to reply

September 30, 2008


Subject: Refusal of Hawking to reply
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 05:55:12 EDT

Thank you for your email to Professor Hawking.

As you can imagine, Prof. Hawking receives many such every day. He very much regrets that due to the severe limitations he works under, and the enormous number of requests he receives, he is unable to compose a reply to every message, and we do not have the resources to deal with many of the specific scientific enquiries and theories we receive.

Please see the website http://www.hawking.org.uk for more information about Professor Hawking, his life and his work.

Yours faithfully

Sam Blackburn

Technical Assistant to Professor S W Hawking CH CBE FRS

Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB3 0WA. United Kingdom.

http://www.hawking.org.uk

This is all that anyone ever gets from hyped up Hawking. Also, Carroll fails or refuses to correspond. As pointed out by Crothers, Carroll’s chapter seven implies:

exp (2a) = 1 – 2GM / r ——————- (1)

Therefore this expression becomes infinite at

r = 0 —————– (2)

and the solution becomes unphysical. Also, the right hand side of Eq. (1) cannot become negative. All black hole and big bang line elements are pure nonsense. This can be seen by high school pupils. Yet billions of public funding are being spent on this nonsense, and children are being frightened into thinking that black holes will destroy the world. An elaborate charade is entered into in Carroll’s chapter seven, called “coordinate transformation”. The result of this was found to be another fiasco this morning, after coordinate transformation, the dual identity of geometry is still violated.

Paper 120, further basic contradictions

September 30, 2008


Subject: Fwd: Paper 120, further basic contradictions
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 05:44:58 EDT

This is entirely in your hands Myron. However, if you require a small contribution from me, simply let me know. However, the important thing, in my view, is to expose this fraud by the ruling scientific establishment – because that is what it really is! Jeremy.

—–Original Message—–

Sent: Tue 30/09/2008 08:02

Subject: Paper 120, further basic contradictions

Agreed, I think that we should make paper 120 into a four author paper: Crothers, Dunning-Davies, Eckardt and myself.

I would welcome your contribution, because there are four independent scientists (and many others) able to see that the black hole stuff is just nonsense. I think that lobbying of MP’s must start, the organized scientific fraud has been proven in many ways. One clear way of seeing this is that the establishment will not answer scholarly criticism. Their funding must therefore be stopped.

***************************************************************************************** To view the terms under which this email is distributed, please go to http://www.hull.ac.uk/legal/email_disclaimer.html *****************************************************************************************