Science Without Fiction
Home Page

WHAT'S NEW????

August 2012
Finally completed and posted my relativity/nature of time lecture on youtube.
Check it out:
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlApCGD_xIE

July 2012
Oh my - it looks like they have found the Higg's!!
For more info - check any science magazine or website out there. Certainly nothing to add here except: Congtats!

WHAT WAS NEW????


12/17/2011
Click on "Errata" page for important update on using GPS to test the validity of Relativity


9/7/2011
James T. Dwyer has submitted an excellent follow-up to last year's article on Dark Matter
which can be found on the Articles/Essays page as well as the Gravity page. Please read!! It is an excellent argument for why Dark Matter might not exist and provides many valuable links to papers written by physicists working on this problem.

WHAT'S NOT AS NEW??

The FQXi essay contest results were announced on June 5, 2011.....

My FQXi essay (submitted on the night of the Feb 15th deadline) did not finish in the top 18. Congratulations to those who did win. A lot of great essays are in the bunch!  I thought I was off to a good start when at the close of the first round (which is where all 161 essay authors vote on each other's essays) I had enough votes to move on to the judging round. The top 35 of the 161 moved on and I was tied for 19th place of 161. Since they picked the top 18 spots and I was sitting at #19, I knew I needed the stars to line up to finish in the money. Better luck next time?
Anyway - since it deals heavily with quantum physics, wave-particle duality and entanglement (in a very introductory nonmathematical style)  - I pasted it on my Entanglement page. Enjoy!     


WHAT'S NOT NEARLY AS NEW????

Open Letter to Corey S. Powell - Editor in Chief     Discover Magazine  
Sent 3/24/10 - posted on the bottom of this page

UPDATE:

A Segment of this letter was printed in the June 2010 issue of Discover Magazine!


WHAT IS SCIENCE WITHOUT FICTION???

The purpose of this site is to help get science back on track. Although the primary focus will remain on physics (specifically, the study of particle physics, forces, time dilation, dark energy, dark matter, etc.) other scientific topics will be discussed and debated.


Original articles will be welcome for submission and after review, appropriate material will be posted for public view.


For far too long, an increasing number of mainstream physicists have been spending a disproportionate amount of time discussing time machines, wormholes, alternate realities, string theory and other baseless topics while other, more fundamental topics in science continue to get less attention despite the fact that they require more study.  


There are an enormous amount of unanswered questions within the confines of real science. Because of this, it makes much more sense to refine our understanding of the more fundamental concepts before we leap ahead with fantastic hypotheses about time machines, wormholes and superstrings.


Although many physicists (along with readers of their books) have apparently found these fantastic topics to be far more exciting, one could certainly make the argument that the diligent pursuit of the truth can be just as exciting.


If you are interested in placing yourself on the real, unexaggerated boundary between the known and the unknown, you will be welcome to enjoy and contribute to this site.     

 


Sent on 3/24/10

 

Open Letter to Corey S. Powell - Editor in Chief     Discover Magazine

 

Dear Mr. Powell:

 

This Letter is a response to your Editor's Note in the April 2010 issue of your magazine. I would like to applaud you for calling attention to some of the ongoing issues in physics that continue to be unresolved. There is a growing number of physicists and physics enthusiasts who question various parts of Einstein's theories in their responsible quest to determine how the universe truly works. I know it has been frustrating for many who have developed and pursued new theories that, in any way, shape or form, conflict with, or call into question, Einstein's established positions. 

 

The content of Discover's April 2010 issue illustrates that this problem extends beyond Relativity. Thanks to a minority of physicists who are "fighting the good fight" many of us have become aware of the socially dysfunctional influences that string theorists have had on the physics community. It's too bad that these unscientifically minded influences have resulted in an amount of effort applied to a theory that is extremely disproportionate with its likelihood of verification or falsifiability.  One wonders if the physicists who continue to lead the charge in string theory and other questionable areas still believe this nonsense themselves? Or do they fully realize what they are dealing with, but have so much invested in it that for them, there is no turning back? 

What doesn't help is the number of wannabes who apparently continue to embrace such fascinating topics that discuss these "hidden dimensions" and "wormholes that will instantly transport them to another place and time." How exciting! No wonder some of those books are still selling like hotcakes.

 

Getting back to Einstein, I have a particular interest in your comment: Now many physicists wonder how long it will be until Einstein's formulations, too, are regarded as a passing fad. In my opinion, any potential progress in discovering the true nature of time, space and entanglement (just to name a few) has, up to this point, been unnecessarily hindered due to a religious adherence to one man's theories, so your statement is very encouraging. I can only hope that more scientists will investigate these unresolved issues with the pure intention of seeking the truth. 

 

One experience I can share with you is my research with time dilation. After exhaustive research, I discovered that what Einstein said about time dilation within the confines of relativity is not possible. When I try to discuss this with physicists, I am usually ignored or insulted. I may as well tell them I am an alien from another planet. When I am engaged by professionals they typically (and very surprisingly) do not have a handle on the basics. The latter group usually defends their positions while misunderstanding some of the fundamentals. And when I begin to point out contradictions in their arguments, they either become insulting or just shut down altogether and cease communication. There are a few who understand and support my position, but not many. 

To be clear - I have never said that time dilation does not exist. I recognize, and even use as examples, the unmistakable dilations encountered in GPS technology. I have also never claimed to dispute other areas of relativity such as the constancy of the speed of light. What I have said, and still say today, is that Einstein's explanation for why time dilates is simply not possible. 

In 1918, Einstein addressed the Twin Paradox by stating that all inertial motion is relative. He also stated that as a consequence of that, a moving clock will see time slow on a stationary clock as legitimately as a stationary clock will see time slow for the moving clock. If this were not stated in exactly this way, then Galileo's principle would fall apart - which is half of Special Relativity. The problem is, however, this is not the way time dilation really works in nature. If Einstein were correct - the GPS satellites (ignoring gravitational dilation) would view the ground clocks as running slower while the ground stations view the satellite clocks as running slower all at the same time. If that were true, the GPS system would be impossible to sync in both directions simultaneously - yet it is fully in sync and works very well. 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 I have actually gone through this step by step with many physicists and it's amazing that most of them can't follow a simple line of reasoning with very basic math. I would expect more from a population who, with ease, can rip through pages of equations defending 7 dimensions that don't exist. 

I actually have a $500 challenge on my website offered to the first person who can prove me wrong. I have not had one single entry. I have had many "discussions" with physicists but when I ask them to put their money where their mouth is - they disappear. And really it's my money where their mouth is because if they are successful they get $500, but if I prove them wrong - I get nothing. It's a challenge, not a bet, so there is no risk to the challengers.


Why do I think that this is so important? Because the nature of time is a key piece of the Universe's puzzle and only through the proper understanding of what makes clocks run faster or slower, will we be able to understand what makes them run at all. One thing is for sure: If we continue to adhere to Einstein's theory of time dilation, we will never get to where we need to go.  
 

 

 

 

 

 

So, at this time, I am urging you to please look into this specific matter that appears to be way too trivial to a population of scientists who would rather skip ahead to the exciting ending of the Story of Our Universe, rather than do some boring work reevaluating some of the fundamentals we may have gotten wrong a long time ago.  I think your magazine is already off to a good start and I hope from this point on, you will intensify an investigative approach that will increase the chances of Theoretical Physics becoming as productive as other branches of science have become in the past 20 years.   

 

Thank you for reading this, and I welcome any comments you may have. 

 

Chris Kennedy

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Web Hosting