The first estimate of photon mass from the method of note 151(1) below has been carried out by Dr Horst Eckardt, producing a plausible value of ten power minus forty one kilograms. This method can be greatly refined by cosmologists and astronomers. A photon of mass m interacts with the sun of mass M, and a correct metrical analysis produces the expected finite photon mass. In view of the obsolescence of the standard physics, funding for meaningless projects such as CERN should be transferred into research on new energy.
Archive for May, 2010
In this case the metric is the possible solution (1) of the Orbital Theorem, but is not a solution of the Einstein field equation. The effective potential and constants of motion of the metric are the same as those of the gravitational metric (the old “Schwarzschild metric”) but its orbit is different, and given by eq. (9).
This note shows that it is possible to calculate the deflection of light with the Minkowski metric. If the velocity of the photon in orbit is assumed to be very close to c, Eq. (19) gives the orbital angular velocity of the photon from the experimentally measured deflection (NASA Cassini). The orbit cannot be a circle, because the integral would be singular, the same problem as in Einstein’s method, or any method that assumes a circular orbit. It becomes clear that the light deflection can be calculated with any metric that is a solution of the Orbital Theorem of UFT 111. The deflection is not due to the Einstein field equation at all.
After the shocking failure of the Einstein method of calculating light deflection due to gravitation there can no longer be any confidence in standard cosmology, so I am returning to the main theme of experimenting with metrics that are solutions of the Orbital Theorem of UFT 111. As can be seen, it is perfectly possible for Einstein to have used the wrong connection symmetry, another major error. In contrast there are no such errors in ECE theory, being based directly on standard geometry.
Thank you for your nomination for Who’s Who in the World 2010. I have filled in the nomination form. I have been in many editions of Marquis since about 1999, (for example I enclose my proof for “Marquis Who’s Who in America, 2009). The updates since 2008 are as follows:
1) Award of Armorial Bearings in July 2008, these are displayed on www.aias.us.
2) Publication of volume seven of M. W. Evans “Generally Covariant Unified Field Theory” (Abramis 2009).
3) Publication of M. W. Evans, S. Crothers, H. Eckardt and K. Pendergast, “Criticisms of the Einstein Field Equation” (Abramis 2010).
4) Publication of K. Pendergast, “The Life of Myron Evans” (Abramis, 2010).
5) Inclusion in the Royal Section of “Burke’s Peerage and Gentry” (2010).
6) Selection of the www.aias.us website for the British National Website Archives through the National Library of Wales (2010) as one of the outstanding websites in Britain.
7) Construction of new websites, www.aias.us, www.atomicprecision.com, www.upitec.org, www.et3m.net
8) Chairman of ECE Technologies Ltd. (2010).
9) Invitation by Queen Elizabeth II on July 20th. 2010 to mark my appointment to the Civil List in 2005.
This is a rough first approximate method for obtaining the photon mass from light deflection due to gravitation. The quantum theory is used to give the total energy of the photon as h bar omega and the orbital angular momentum of the photon estimated in a rough approximation. It is seen that a is the radius of the sun in this method, and is not infinite as in the incorrect Einstein method. The value of b is found by working out the integral numerically, and using the observed deflection in radians (not in arcseconds, a non S.I. unit). If this method gives something which is at all sensible for photon mass, it can be included in Section 3 of paper 150. The photon mass is estimated independently to be less than ten power minus fifty kilograms.
I have left this as an open question. The two parameters are related, and related to photon mass m. Finding the photon mass has been a goal of relativistic physics since it was proposed by Einstein himself in about 1906, so even a rough estimate would be important. Einstein’s calculation of light deflection though is a complete shambles, wrong by a factor of about a million. I don’t know how the standard “establishment”, if there is one, is going to wriggle out of this one. Probably by trying to ignore the criticism.
These are the first two sections of paper 150, I will send around the doc file shortly, and send all the background notes to Dave Burleigh for posting as usual.
Our main feedback site records exactly 60,000, and as I am 60 today this looks like a good old fashioned pagan omen. I will consult the oak tree about its meaning. I think it means that I am entitled to pension credits and will not starve.
The computer test was carried out by Dr. Horst Eckardt by numerically integrating the integral used by Albert Einstein in his famous theory of light deflection by gravitation. The integral is Eq. (6.3.41) of Robert M. Wald, “General Relativity” (Chicago, 1984), page 145. Results indicate that the Einstein theory fails completely, the integral does not give the claimed result (6.3.43) of Wald, page 146. In other words the method used by Einstein is completely erroneous by about six orders of magnitude. The integral is not difficult to compute on a desk top. Einstein used the wrong symmetry for the connection in his field equation, and incorrectly eliminated spacetime torsion (see for example UFT 139 on this site). Schwarzschild’s original papers of 1916 do not give the mis-named “Schwarzschild metric” which leads to the disaster just described for the Einsteinian theory. It is hoped that these results will be viewed with objectivity.