Re: Getting there at last...

Am 04.04.2024 um 04:18 schrieb Arindam Banerjee:

Le 03/04/2024 à 16:58, Thomas Heger a écrit :

Am 02.04.2024 um 09:07 schrieb The Starmaker:

Thomas Heger wrote:

>
Am 30.03.2024 um 11:38 schrieb Arindam Banerjee:

Le 30/03/2024 à 18:48, Thomas Heger a écrit :

Am 28.03.2024 um 08:09 schrieb Arindam Banerjee:
>

>
Maybe you like my 'book'
>
>
>
>
https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1Ur3_giuk2l439fxUa8QHX4wTDxBEaM6lOlgVUa0cFU4/edit?usp=sharing
>

...

It is some 100 times better than the one used before.  Much less power
consumption, far more force on the bullet which could be a guided
missile at hypersonic speeds.
>
As for my gun, check out
https://groups.google.com/g/sci.physics/c/VtFeGAkIABg/m/CLPzLRElAwAJ
Follow the link to the 2-sec video.
>

>
and trying to connect QM and GR is...apples and oranges.

>
Both are nonsense to me.
When inertia is busted, entropy and relativity and quantum are also busted.
Aether is back, filling the infinite universe.
>
I hope you realise that one day.

I have actually written a longish critique of 'On the electrodynamics of moving bodies'
(here:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1RkhX-B5u7X4ga0QH-C53RddjQGctZVdo/view )
and know what you mean.
But I think, that relativity is not entirely wrong.
It is a principle, which is VERY counterintuitive and not discussed very often:
we have a forward and a backwards time, which both occur and are both real.
Which time is forward, that is debatable, hence both are and the other one is in relative motion 'backwards'.
About QM I had to criticise a few points, too.
That was mainly the particle concept itself.
Particles are assumed to be lasting entities, created shortly after the big bang.
But I found a counter-example: Growing Earth.
Since the Earth is in fact growing, the idea of lasting particles cannot be true.
So, in a way, I had to strike a few assumptions, but maintain the idea itself (of GR and QM).
It's not my business anyhow, since what I tried to do, that is finding the connection between GR and QM and didn't attempt to justify these branches of physics.
TH

>