Fwd-Reply: Another T.O.E. with Some Evidence, using Aether, Waves!

DMBoss1021@aol.com
Tue, 14 Dec 1999 10:47:46 EST

SWB writes:
<<Not to burst anyone's bubbles; but there really is hardly anything
'scalar' or mysterious about the physical effects of sound pressure
energy on water, as demonstrated on these web pages.
>>

Reply:

You are absolutely correct, the one particular page that shows this "analogy"
is not mysterious or scalar. It is as you state, the result of sound
pressure waves, reflected from the walls of a certain geometry "enclosure",
and dependent on the properties of the "medium", i.e., water. It would not
occur like this with other geometry, or medium properties.

But it does graphically illustrate the interesting effect of how "standing
waves" form apparent nodes and antinodes, which maintain their structure, and
spatial relationships, given the appropriate geometry, and medium properties.

I assume (perhaps naively) that this analogy, can be applied to the more
complex ideas of wave motion through the aether. Which may support EM waves,
scalar waves, or some other wave motion. If true, then there is the
possibility that matter, gravity, inertia, light, among others may be
(standing) wave phenomenon.

The rest of this site concerning the T.O.E. , deals with the pervasive
relationships observed in the universe, that are directly related to a
possible "wave nature" of reality. And his proposal that Maxwell's Equations
can be shown to describe this wave nature, are intriguing. (but that math is
beyond me)

This site, "Harmonics Theory", in my opinion, offers support for Wagner's
measured "Wave nature of Gravity", as well as some of Wagner's other
postulate/findings.

Also intriguing is finding another besides Beardon, who postulates that we
have not correctly interpreted Maxwell's Equations, and that perhaps (or
definitely) they describe and allow for many "mysterious" phenomenon, and
lead to a real "medium" for space.

As such, perhaps our existing theories and models (accepted) are not
incorrect, just incomplete or misinterpreted. Perhaps as stated in the
Decemeber issue of Scientific American: "The most important discoveries of
the next 50 years
are likely to be ones of which we cannot now even conceive", from the article
entitled "The Unexpected Science to Come"
by Sir John Maddox.

see this article:
http://www.sciam.com/1999/1299issue/1299maddox.html

And another in the same issue:
<<A Unified Physics by 2050?
Experiments at CERN and elsewhere should let us complete the Standard Model
of particle physics, but a unified theory of all forces will probably require
radically new ideas

by Steven Weinberg >>

http://www.sciam.com/1999/1299issue/1299weinberg.html

Thanks for your feedback, interest, and objective debate.

Sincerely,

DMBoss1021

-------------------------------------------------------------
To leave this list, email <listserver@keelynet.com>
with the body text: leave Interact
list archives and on line subscription forms are at
http://keelynet.com/interact/
-------------------------------------------------------------