Peer Review/Critique by William A. Koldewyn, PhD
The following critique
of David Allan's August '00 Transition Article
is written by a professional from Ball Aerospace. Dr. Koldewyn did not
write it with public display in mind, but has agreed to its being posted here
for the sake of open disclosure of reservations held by colleagues in the
field.
Feedback on Allan
UFT by William Koldewyn Ph.D.
Monday, September 11, 2000
Dave,
Thanks for giving me the opportunity to comment. I apologize for taking so
long to write a response but this has not been easy to write and work has been
hectic as well. I have been working quite hard to finish two detectors {info(1) | info(2)} that will be put into the Hubble
Space Telescope about November 2001. With those nearly done, I now need to
complete the backup detectors. Nevertheless, when I received the updated
version of the transition article, I knew I needed to complete my comments if
they were to be of any value to you.
I am not sure where to start. I believe what is needed is not another
supporter but rather someone who is willing to perform something akin to a
peer review. As a professional scientist myself, I will try to remain
objective. That is not necessarily easy since we have known each other for
twenty plus years and I value our association and friendship. Nevertheless, I
must tell you that I am troubled when I read these papers, especially when I
compare them with your other writing such as the recent tech notes for HP. The
tech notes are careful, detailed and precise. The others seem filled with a
plethora of unsupported assertions and lack any detail that would allow
another investigator to check either the theory or the experiments. It is hard
for me to believe both were written by the same person. It is a "through
the looking glass" experience to read them. The thought has crossed my
mind that you are really just playing a joke on all of us, an Alan Sokal kind
of trick. Time will tell. Meanwhile, I will assume you are serious and attempt
to review what I read as objectively as I can. From a format standpoint, I
will key off your transition article by inserting comments. I will put them in
brackets and a different color but the color may not transfer well across word
processors – I am using MS Word97 and I will also make a translation to
WordPerfect 5.x for windows. At times I may jump to the other articles where
you refer to them. I will try to make those jumps clear.
Exciting News for New Unified Field Theory (UFT): Write up
now available; additional validation information and experiments.
26 August 2000
On 20 December 1999, we finished writing a paper entitled, "A Unified
Field Theory and some Experimental Evidence" -- hereinafter called
"Original UFT paper." We submitted this 31-page paper to Science
Magazine for publication. Because the editors felt it to be a
"string-theory" approach, they suggested that it be submitted to
Physical Review or the like for consideration. Rather then pursue its
publication, we have felt to make it available to the public at this time
while pursuing additional research and experimental validations for the new
UFT. We took this decision to accelerate the work and the introduction of this
new UFT that others may more quickly participate in the research and
utilization.
[In general, the UFT paper is not written as I would expect a scientific
paper to be written and I can assure you (and I think you know it as well as I
do) that a Journal like Physical Review would never publish it as it is. The
paper asserts numerous seemingly unrelated ideas with absolutely no evidence
or supporting logic. Some items are just plain bizarre. Do you seriously think
that other scientists will give any credibility to someone who attempts to
explain, using a unified field theory, why your hair may stand out after
jumping on a trampoline? Perhaps this is an attempt at humor but I assure you
that if there is one thing reviewers don’t have, it’s a sense of humor.
Other items are just plain wrong. For example, the comments about heating the
Earth from nuclear explosions and its relationship to global warming. Run the
numbers! Whether or not you believe in man-induced global warming (and, based
on a study of the data, I do not) this scenario does not work. If all the
energy from all 2041 documented tests were simultaneously and instantaneously
put into the Earth, its temperature would rise less than 0.5 nano-degrees
Kelvin.]
On 16 March 2000, we finished writing a paper entitled, "New
Gravitational Theory with Experimental Validation." The most significant
aspect of this new theory is the discovery of diallel, gravitational- field
lines. In this paper we report an experiment constructed in such a way as to
contrast the classical theory with the new theory. Simple pendulum clocks were
used as the gravitational-field detectors. Under the experimental
configuration, the new theory predicts a clock slowing while classical theory
predicts a very slight speeding up due to a mass being introduced underneath a
pendulum clock. We observed clock slowing consistent with the new theory that
depends upon energy density and not just the mass.
[March 24 paper][Perhaps it’s a nit, but the use of the word
"discovered" is inappropriate. For example, Robert Dicke did not say
he had discovered a scalar part of the gravitational field rather, he proposed
the idea and showed the theoretical consequences of a scalar-tensor theory vs.
a purely tensor formulation.]
[Also, I can’t follow your equations. Density and energy are usually
scalars so without an example or more explanation, the equations are difficult
or impossible to interpret. In any case, it would be helpful if you would use
conventional notation rather than invent a new one. In equation 2, force is
obviously a vector but it is unclear how the product of two integrals of
tensors (shown here as scalars) over volumes results in a vector. It also
seems from equation 1, that G should be squared.]
[I see no way that the assertion in the first sentence of section 3 can
follow from the equations.]
[The equations (1, 2) describe a two-body interaction whereas the
experiment in section 4 appears to be a three-body interaction where the
attraction of two bodies (the earth and the pendulum) is modified by the
presence of a third body, the High-Energy Density Object (HEDO). Your
equations don’t appear to describe this case.]
[The heterodyne approach to data collection is clever though I think
similar to what others have used in previous pendulum measurements of g.
However, I think your use of synchronous detection is incorrect. The point of
synchronous detection is to modulate the signal and not the noise and thereby
be able to separate them. One likely source of noise is base motion and
tipping caused by moving massive objects. By moving the high-energy density
object from one pendulum to the other, you have probably modulated the noise
as well as any possible signal. Therefore, the signal you extracted is very
probably demodulated noise – at least in part.]
[How can you claim that the data are consistent with a 5th power
law when you only have two, perhaps three data points? Mathematically, that
makes no sense.]
In addition, the original UFT paper predicted that between the first part
of May 2000 and the middle of June 2000 "... The possibility of increased
radio and electromagnetic transmission interference, the possibility of
increased weather activity, the possibility of increased volcanic and
earthquake activity, the Aurora Borealis should be large…" The new UFT
shows how diallel lines couple energy from the sun to the earth. Since we are
near solar maximum, part of these predictions naturally follow. However, the
new UFT predictions that all of these activities would be at a significantly
higher level than would be naturally expected from classical theory. Since
these predictions have been basically validated, this adds one more validation
to our list.
It has been particularly interesting that the solar sunspot level has
continued to rise significantly after the May-June time frame of this year. In
the new theory, one of the uncertainties in the prediction of sun spot
activity is our lack of knowledge of the future magnetic field intensities of
all the planets. Last year as we modeled and predicted sun-spot levels, one
particular model we used, and which fit the historic data well, gave
predictions that fit this year’s sun spot level better than the model
decided upon. We chose a more conservative model than this particular model,
and with 20/20 hindsight, we chose wrong. Working the new UFT backwards would
imply that the magnetic field intensity taken across the planets (particularly
the gas planets) has increased significantly more than our conservative model
would give.
[Back to this paper][The problem with the above comments is that there is
nothing unusual about this particular Solar Max. I have followed it with some
interest inasmuch as I was the Ball program manager for UVCS, an instrument on
the SOHO spacecraft at L1. Nothing I have read would suggest that this Solar
Max is outside expectations. It is worth remembering that we have observed
only three cycles with anything close to this level of detail. OSO1 was March
1962.
With these two validations added to our list, plus seven additional
validations (outlined below) uncovered since the writing of the original UFT
paper, this brings the total to 43 validations for this new UFT. There were 34
experiments and/or novel explanations listed in the original paper in support
of this new UFT.
[I thought I saw 47 items. Anyway, of the items listed, two of them are, in
my opinion, appropriate. Those are 1 and 43. The first is the subject of the
paper and 43 is the only one which offers any possibility of demonstrating a
predictive calculation and supporting (or refuting) experimental data.]
Also, in the original UFT paper we outlined 13 additional experiments --
two of which have now been completed -- that further validate the new UFT.
Listed below are nine additional experiments. Hence, we now have 20 suggested
experiments that could be performed to test and/or utilize this new UFT.
We now make this original UFT paper available to the public on our website
[www.allanstime.com]. In addition, we are combining the 16 March 2000 paper
with some new experimental results on diallel line bending. This combined
paper is being prepared for publication.
Before listing additional validations, we will give a very brief
explanation of this new unified field theory. Those desiring more are referred
to the original UFT paper now available on our website. By way of review, this
new theory shows how all of the force fields work together. In 1905, Einstein
suggested the particle nature of light. In 1924, de Broglie suggested the wave
nature of particles. In 1928, Bohr suggested that a complete knowledge of
phenomena on atomic dimensions requires a description of both wave and
particle properties. Following these suggestions and supporting
experimentation, it has been believed that it is impossible to simultaneously
observe both the wave and particle aspects in a single experiment of either a
particle or a photon. This new UFT provides great insight into the wave and
particle nature of all entities and their inter-relationship.
One of the most significant discoveries in this new unified field theory is
the existence of diallel, gravitational-field lines. This new UFT describes
how every entity has a set of diallel lines emanating outward from it. These
diallel lines carry the wave nature of particles and the particle nature of
waves or photons. Hence, the dual nature of matter is built into this new UFT.
Much of this is outlined in the original UFT paper. For example, the diallel
lines extending out from the earth couple with the diallel lines of a human
being to create the gravitational attraction that is felt.
We have conducted experiments demonstrating the existence of these diallel
lines . [I would have to disagree. The existence
is not demonstrated, at least to my satisfaction.] Other experiments are under way that will show the nature, and
characteristics of these diallel lines. The theory provides some extremely
important information about the characteristics of nature with many new
physical insights. But most profound are the spiritual insights in how these
diallel lines function as part of the creation process. For example, we learn
from this new UFT that particle and information flow are not limited by the
velocity of light. There are no such things as gravitons. We have learned how
gravity works and that antigravity transport is possible. We have learned that
these diallel lines are conduits for all of the force fields and for all of
the information and particle flow throughout the universe.
[The above assertions are fascinating but neither the equations you put
forward nor any experiments performed or proposed seem to even hint at these
consequences.]
Since we wrote the original UFT paper in December of last year, the
following seven experiments and/or validations have already been conducted
and/or have come to our attention. These are helpful as we are still learning
coefficients for the new theory. From these measurements and validations we
can now better make predictions.
1) Observations made at the National Physical Research Institute in 1955
by Mishra and Rao [Mishra, 1997] reveal variations of the gravitational
field during the time of a solar eclipse. They observed over about a 20
minute period a peak to peak variation of about 1e-8 cm/s^2. Similar
observations by others followed those of Mishra and Rao. The new theory
shows that field enhancements occur when three body alignments take place.
During this time, the diallel lines between all three bodies line up. The
UFT field equation of this case gives rise to a gravitational field
modification. A solar eclipse is a classic case in point. The effects
observed by Mishra and Rao are nicely explained by the new theory in the
dynamics and in the augmentation arising from the diallel lines lining up --
giving rise to a dispersion curve in the gravitational potential.
[I have read four of Mishra’s papers (95, 96, 96,98) but he made no
reference to this observation. In any case, at 1X10-8 cm/s2
he would be operating at 1 part in 1011 of g, which is at the
optimistic edge of his capability according to his own paper. Also, it is
unclear to me how UFT predicts such an effect or what sign it should be.]
2) Also at the time of solar eclipses, deviations of the plane of
oscillation of a Foucault pendulum are observed. These were first observed on
30 June 1954 and again on 20 to October 1959, and were reported by Nobel Prize
winner Maurice Allais. Since then others have observed similar effects. In the
equation for the rate of rotation of the plane of oscillation of a Foucault
pendulum, there are three independent terms that determine that rate. They are
the spin rate of the earth, the latitude of the pendulum, and the
gravitational field. From the equation of motion, one can observe that a
change in the spin rate of the earth has the same effect as a change in the
gravitational field on the rate of change of the plane of oscillation of a
Foucault pendulum. Hence, this experiment and observation as with 1) above, is
consistent with the new theory since a modification in the gravitational field
is predicted. A speeding up of the Foucault pendulum oscillation plane has
been observed; with additional care, both a speeding up followed by a slight
slowing down is predicted by the new UFT.
[It is probably worth mentioning that Allais got the Nobel Prize in
economics but then Cavendish was also a minister – some people do more that
one thing. I do wonder about Allais’ experience identifying systematic
errors. The effect he saw was very large. And again, it is unclear to me how
UFT predicts such an effect or what sign it should be. The comment that:
"From the equation of motion, one can observe that a change in the spin
rate of the earth has the same effect as a change in the gravitational field
on the rate of change of the plane of oscillation of a Foucault
pendulum." is incorrect. To first order, at least, the value of g has no
affect on the rate of rotation of the pendulum’s plane of oscillation. (See
Fowles, Analytical Mechanics; Landau & Lifshitz, Mechanics; Goldstein,
Classical Mechanics) Besides, with Mishra, the effect is in the noise whereas
with Allais the effect changes by more than an order of magnitude – how can
both be consistent with UFT?]
3) A correlation has been observed between the magnetic field orientation
of the planet Uranus and the occurrence of earthquakes. The planet Uranus is
unique in that its magnetic field axis is at right angles to its spin axis.
According to the new theory, the diallel lines going between Uranus and the
earth, and which carry the gravitational attraction information between these
two bodies, have the gravitational information flow modulated in its intensity
by the magnetic field orientations of these two bodies. Because of the unique
magnetic field vector direction of the planet Uranus, the principal modulation
of the gravitational attraction is due to the magnetic field orientation of
the vector for Uranus. In addition, according to the new theory, the electron
flow between these two bodies is also modulated by the same vector. These
effects can induce gravitational field gradients on the earth, which in turn
increase the probability of disturbances, such as earthquakes, volcanoes, etc.
[I believe the magnetic dipole of Uranus rotates about the Uranus / Sun
line with a period of hours not days or years so such a correlation seems
unlikely. Beside, again, it is unclear how UFT relates even if such a
correlation were found.]
4) Mr. Michael K. Lee, a high school teacher in Hawaii, has uncovered a
correlation between the occurrence of earthquakes and solar or lunar eclipses.
His web site is www.damien.edu/lee/method.html. Observing the shadow of
the moon over the planet’s subduction zones and faults, he has correlated
these lunar movements with the historical database of earthquakes that have
been recorded over the last 2000 years. Mr. Lee made 70 predictions over the
last two years at an accuracy rate of 40 percent. The new UFT explains why Mr.
Lee’s technique works. In the new theory there are two considerations
relevant to this situation. First, the alignment of three significant bodies
(the earth, moon, and the sun) brings about a gravitational field enhancement,
as the diallel lines between these three bodies become parallel. Second, the
dynamics involved bringing the three bodies in and out of alignment brings
about a dispersion curve behavior in the gravitational field. Hence, there is
a significant gravitational field gradient as the bodies come in and out of
alignment. Clearly, the induced gravitational field gradients provide a very
plausible mechanism for triggering earthquake and volcanic activity.
[Because maximum strain in the crust due to earth tides is associated with
eclipses (like maximum ocean tides are) scientists have for years tried to
correlate quakes with eclipses. As far as I know, no one has succeeded. If Mr
Lee really has something, a lot of people should be very interested. How does
this relate to UFT?]
5) According to the new UFT, when a high energy-density source is placed on
the earth, the diallel lines of the earth will be bent inward slightly toward
the axis of symmetry like light through a lens. Placing a pendulum clock above
this high energy-density source results in pendulum clock slowing due to
diallel-line bending according to this new UFT. This experiment has been
conducted with affirmative results and is in preparation for publication.
[This describes a three-body interaction – the equations don’t seem to
deal with that case. The HEDO effectively reduces local g – acts like
shielding. I made other comments earlier.]
6) Direct evidence of diallel-line coupling has been recently observed
between the earth and the sun. One correlating aspect is observed by looking
at the weather patterns on the earth on any given day and then by looking at
how that correlates with the location of the sunspots on the face of the sun.
One often observes aspects of a mirror image, as the new UFT would predict.
(See the original UFT paper for more details on how this coupling takes place,
and see: http://www.tstonramp.com/~wright/wrightworld.htm
[Show the data. I have never heard of any such correlation.]
7) The new UFT predicts an interesting interaction between electrons
flowing in diallel lines and photons orthogonally intersecting these
electrons. If these diallel-line electrons are in an excited diallel-line
quantum state such that their de Broglie like wavelengths are resonant with
the orthogonal, monochromatic laser photons, then an interaction probability
takes place in a nonlinear environment, e.g. the face of a laser reflecting
mirror. This interaction results in blue shifted reflected photons and UV
radiation orthogonal to both the photon direction and the diallel,
gravitational-field lines. We conducted this experiment at BYU on 21 August
2000 and detected the UV radiation coming from the diallel-line quantum
transition. This is the first experiment of its kind and a publication is in
process.
[This could be an interesting result. I look forward to seeing more detail
such as the theoretical calculation tying the experimental result to the
theory, where exactly the light was emitted, what the wavelength of the light
was, its temporal relationship to the energy pulse, the nature and size of the
pulse, the experimental setup, precautions against light-leaks and other
potential systematic errors, etc.]
Here, we briefly outline nine additional experiments beyond those discussed
in the previously mentioned paper. Some of these are being pursued at the
present time. For those wishing to pursue any of these experiments, please
contact our website and additional information will be given to help you set
up the experiment in a successful way.
We are also in the process at this time of designing an experiment that
will allow the observation of the dual nature of matter in the same
experiment. We have already gained significant insights in the process of
setting this up, and we anticipate that this will provide a very important
understanding of the new physics associated with this new UFT.
A brief conceptual outline of the nine experiments mentioned is given
below:
1) In the new UFT, a plumb-bob follows the diallel lines that define the
local vertical. Hence, the bending of diallel lines could be observed
interferometrically by measuring the movement of a laser mirror suspended by
a string and acting as a plumb-bob. At the edge of a high energy-density
source, the diallel lines are bent inward. The amount of bending above a
fully charged 12-volt car battery, for example, when all the facets of the
theory are taken into account is of the order of a microradian. With care
this could be measured. This experiment is in process and preliminary and
affirmative results have been obtained.
[The measurement is not all that difficult especially if you use the
technique I wrote to you about earlier. That is essentially the method used by
Mishra in his pendulum. I describe it in detail in my thesis (1976) and Cook
used something similar many years earlier. I have wondered if this system
conserves energy – or perhaps makes it. By rotating a balanced disk, at
resonance with the plumb bob, with a region of high-energy density, one should
be able to pump the amplitude and hence add energy to the system. Where does
the energy come from? Since this is again a three body problem, I don’t see
how UFT deals with it.]
2) The equation for the gravitational force in the new UFT is a function of
the energy density. Hence, a slight increase in weight occurs for a high
energy density source compared to that predicted by classical theory. A very
sensitive mechanical balance scale could be made to make this measurement. By
changing the energy density on one side the balance will be modified.
Unknowingly, this experiment has been done in part by NASA, JPL [J. Anderson,
et. al] as they reported and "extra tug" toward the sun on some
spacecraft. In the new theory, this extra gravitational attraction is due to
the presence of a high energy-density power supply to power the spacecraft.
[Is the HEDO in the pan or under the pan of the balance? If in the pan, I
think the experiment has been done with a null result. However, I don’t know
what sensitivity you require. NIST can, I believe, compare 1kg masses at a few
parts in 1010 – perhaps a little better. If the HEDO is under the
pan this result would directly contradict the clock rate experiment.
3) The GPS satellite clocks pass directly between the earth and the sun
every six months. Since during this eclipse, the diallel lines for the sun,
the satellite, and the earth are parallel, there will be a modification of the
gravitational field at the satellite. Since the clocks are sensitive to the
gravitational potential, there will be relativistic frequency shift and hence
a time shift of the clocks during the eclipse. The size of the effect may be
too small to be measured with the existing clocks on-board the satellites.
Some of the clocks now being designed for space may be have high enough
performance to show this effect.
[This is where you are most expert. What magnitude and sign shift do you
calculate? Since only one satellite is exactly between the sun and earth at
any moment, there ought to be a differential measurement and synchronous
demodulation technique to improve the signal to noise ratio. Also, why doesn’t
the anti eclipse position have the same effect?]
4) The interaction of photons orthogonal to the direction of the diallel
lines is extremely interesting in this new theory. As there are quantum levels
in the elements, so there are quantum levels in the diallel lines. The quantum
levels in the atoms nominally have spherical symmetry while the diallel lines
nominally have cylindrical symmetry. As there are de Broglie wavelengths for
the electrons in an atom, so there are wavelengths for the diallel-line
electrons. We have chosen to call these NED waves, named after Niels Bohr,
Albert Einstein, and Louis de Broglie. In the new UFT, the photons have a
probability of interacting with these NED waves on a properly prepared
reflecting surface. Placing a Fabry-Perot interferometer directly over a high
energy-density source with highly monochromatic laser photons driving the
Fabry-Perot cavity orthogonal to the diallel lines, then as the photons
interact with the diallel-line electron NED waves on the surface of the Fabry-Perot
mirrors, they will be blue shifted -- deriving energy from the excited
diallel-line electrons. The Fabry-Perot cavity increases the probability of
interaction because of the multiple reflections of the laser photons. In
addition, a very slight quantum phase shift occurs because of the slight
slowing of the velocity of light in a vacuum because of the higher density of
diallel lines according to the new theory. As part of the quantum transition,
UV radiation is also emitted. Hence, three effects can be observed from this
experiment: both a phase-shift and a frequency-shift of the laser photons
along with UV emissions. This also may be the first experiment to show that
the velocity of light is not constant in a vacuum. In addition, this
experimental configuration provides the opportunity of frequency division from
the optical region of the spectrum to the RF region. This is extremely
important for atomic clock metrology.
[Most lasers are just Fabry-Perot cavities with appropriate excited media
in them (HeNe for example). That being the case, one could do an
extraordinarily sensitive measurement by beating two stabilized lasers against
each other – one near a HEDO the other not.]
5) As perturbing effects have been observed on the rotation rate of a
Foucault pendulum during a solar eclipse, so should there be effects during a
lunar eclipse. The effects will be smaller, but with care they could be
measured.
[I agree that if there is an effect for a solar eclipse there should also
be an effect for a lunar eclipse but I see no reason why it should be
substantially different. Whether there is an effect at all remains to be
determined.]
6) Similar to 5), as perturbing effects have been observed in the
gravitational field during a solar eclipse, so should there are effects during
a lunar eclipse. The effects will be smaller, but with additional care and
setting up the experiments properly, these effects could be measured.
[See earlier comment.]
7) Correlations have been observed between the magnetic field direction of
the planet Uranus and earthquake activity. As has been mentioned, this is
consistent with the new UFT. In addition, the theory predicts a correlation
between the same magnetic field vector of the planet Uranus and the level of
sun spot activity. (See the original UFT paper for more details)
[See earlier comment.]
8) The magnetic fields of gas planets are significantly larger than that of
the earth. Since the attraction between two bodies is a function of their
energy densities, the attraction of the moons of these gas planets will be a
function of the magnetic field energy stored within each of the planets. Since
the periods of the moons of the planets can be measured quite accurately, a
change in the periods should have a term that correlates with changes in the
magnetic field energy stored in the planet. This same measurement could be
made with the earth moon system -- though the effects would be smaller.
However, the period of our moon is measured extremely accurately.
[It would also apply the orbital periods of the planets as affected by the
magnetic field of the sun. I am unaware of any known variations in these
periods but in any case it sounds like a difficult measurement since you also
need to know the magnetic energy very well. But since the sun’s magnetic
field flips every 11 years, (aprox.) should one look for an 11 or 22 year
modulation in the planets’ orbital rates?]
9) Mercury pools are used in astronomy as mirrors. The orientation of the
mirror is defined by the local zenith. In the new UFT, the local vertical is
defined by the diallel lines. Placing a high energy-density source under a
mercury-pool mirror, the mirror would take a slightly concave shape.
Therefore, if a Fraunhofer wave of light impinged the surface of the mirror,
it would reflect off nonparallel, and this could be detected. The surface of
the mercury mirror would map out the diallel-line bending. For a car battery,
for example, the bending on the edges of the mirror would be of the order of a
micro-radian.
[You can produce the same effect by rotating the pool. So, the HEDO
produces the equivalent of centrifugal force. This is really just a different
implementation of a plumb bob.]
Gaining an understanding of this new UFT has lead to many exciting
discoveries and insights. The general field equation given in the original UFT
paper has lead to many of these insights and discoveries. However, we can see
that we are still in the very beginnings of our understandings. We are just
learning some coefficients so that calculations and predictions can be made.
As we said in the conclusion of the above-cited paper, "Much more
development is needed to fully appreciate this new unified field theory. Taken
to its completion and used properly, we believe it could greatly bless the
inhabitants of the earth."
The work will progress much more rapidly if others will join in the
experimentation and in developing understanding of the theory of how these
diallel lines function. We have set up our website as a catalyst to this end.
Some recent developments have occurred that are very exciting, but they cannot
be shared at this time. As soon as they are properly written up, we will share
them on our website.
Our work has been greatly assisted by friends and colleagues as they have
discovered and shared information consistent with the new UFT. This is another
reason for the website so that such information and discoveries can be openly
shared. We deeply appreciate the support we have enjoyed from family, friends,
and colleagues. They have provided much useful information and have
contributed much.
[You are to be commended for your willingness to subject your hypotheses to
experimental verification. That is the way of science and the only way to know
the truth in such matters. It is, however, important to not try to
explain every experimental or observational anomaly with UFT. When you do, it
starts to sound like snake oil. Most anomalies are anomalies. Experimenters
make mistakes and often don’t completely understand their apparatus.
Materials and equipment sometimes do things we never figure out. So, stick
with the easy to understand and implement. Publish the theory in detail so
that other experimenters can do the calculations, do the experiments and
confirm the hypotheses (or not). If a few people get consistent positive
results, that base will generate a huge interest across the entire physics
community.]
[To be honest, I doubt that these effects are real. (Which makes me one of
the better people to make the measurements.) The experimental techniques seem
much too casual and the search for and analysis of possible systematic errors
appears to be totally absent. For his own protection, an experimenter must be
skeptical of his own work – everyone else will. It’s much better to find
your own mistakes. Nevertheless, I have an open mind and would gladly perform
some experiments myself – assuming I have enough information to do the
calculations, make quantitative predictions and the predicted effects are
within my ability to discern.]
We have felt the blessings of the Creator in understanding a small aspect
of that which he has created. We have been given a glimpse of the harmony and
purposes thereof. We have seen enough to see that the long-term ramifications
of this new UFT are enormous -- both as it effects society and as it effects
each of us individually. Our goal in regard to this new UFT is to see that it
is used to maximum benefit of humankind as understandings, insights, and
applications evolve.
We have seen a fulfillment of Goethe’s great insight, when creative ideas
are received and acted upon. He said, "that the moment one definitely
commits oneself... [to follow this path of truth] Providence moves too. All
sorts of things occur to help one that would never otherwise have occurred. A
whole stream of events issues from the decision, raising in one’s favor all
manner of unforeseen incidents and meetings and material assistance, which no
man could have dreamed would have come his way." We thank all of those
who have assisted so significantly, and especially we thank the hand of
Providence.
[One almost never hears any reference to the Creator in scientific writings
– and that is a shame. While I don’t believe that belief in God is
necessary to do good science, having humility helps one view one’s own work
honestly and accept the possibility of error. My personal belief that free
agency is a fundamental law prevents be from believing that God just hands out
truth with no effort. The real blessing is that we have intelligence and have
been placed in a rational universe that operates according to laws. Therefore,
with work and patience we can figure out, bit by bit, how things work.
At the end of my thesis I put a quote from Sir John Pringle (1775) which
says it quite well: "But so transcendently great is that part of the
creation, that though the Divine Author has vouchsafed, in these latter days,
to open to the humble and patient inquirers into Nature the Causes of Things;
yet we must still cry with the ancient sage, Lo, these are part of His ways,
but how little a portion is heard of them!"]
I send this intending it to be constructive and helpful – hopefully it
will be.
Sincerely,
Bill Koldewyn
See also
The URL of the above page is:
http://www.allanstime.com/UnifiedFieldTheory/transition_Aug00_wkfeedback.htm
|
