Archive for November, 2011

Test Case against Wind Turbines

November 30, 2011

I would advise all anti wind turbine groups across Europe to sue the wind turbine companies for damage to health and environment in class actions. Beaufort and Wind Power could be sued for many millions. I would advise all parties to combine in Parliament to pass a Land Act to eliminate profiteering by hereditary aristocrats. A class action means that costs are shared. The Cambrian Mountains group could sue Scottish and Southern.

In a message dated 30/11/2011 15:25:35 GMT Standard Time, writes:

cc Welsh Government

Couple settle with wind farm operators over ‘unbearable hum’

A couple have settled a High Court damages action against the owners and operators of a wind farm they say drove them from their farmhouse home with its ”unbearable” noise.

11:11AM GMT 30 Nov 2011

A judge was told today the terms of the settlement agreed by tenant farmers Sarah Jane and Julian Davis were strictly confidential.


“Mr Harrison (Davis’ lawyer) added: “Further, at least until recently when their own recordings and monitoring have finally forced the defendants to acknowledge they are causing problems, their approach has been to try and shoot the messenger”. ”
“Mr and Mrs Davis, who have two grown-up children, were seeking an injunction to bring about modification of the operation of the wind farm, plus £400,000 damages to compensate them for the noise nuisance.

Alternatively the couple asked for damages plus a “like for like” replacement for their farm home they estimate is worth about £2.5 million.

Mrs Davis emphasised that her wish was to move back from rented accommodation into her home.

The couple said the “horrible” noise problem caused by the 320ft (100m) high turbines could be resolved by removing two of the turbines and limiting the hours of operation of a third.

Mark Duchamp
Chairman, World Council for Nature
President, Save the Eagles International

UFT200 Version 6

November 30, 2011

This version includes section 4 on astronomy and cosmology. I think that UFT200 is most timely now because of the major and very sudden paradigm shift of UFT190 ff. So all the papers are put in context in this review. UFT200 can also be used to construct textbooks with the most up to date material. Thought in ECE theory is evolving very rapidly. Large sections of physics have been changed completely in only about two years, a classic paradigm shift of major proportions, something that is clear to all from the feedback today. At CERN all they do is to go a tiny bit “beyond” something that is in shredded tatters. That is not worth the billions, especially as they have found nothing of interest. It is pointless trying to cling to the old dogma now.


British University Sector in November 2011

November 30, 2011

There were visits to this month from many British universities as follows:

Aberystwyth, Bath, Birmingham, Bristol, Brooklands, Brunel, Christ’s Cambridge, Churchill Cambridge, Darwin Cambridge, Jesus Cambridge, CSX Cambridge, PF Cambridge, Newnham Cambridge, Selwyn Cambridge, Durham*, Edinburgh*, Glasgow*, Hull, Herriot Watt, Imperial*, King’s College London, Lancaster*, Leeds, Leicester, Luton, Manchester*, Newcastle upon Tyne, Nottingham, Keble Oxford, Lincoln Oxford, Magdalen Oxford, Materials Oxford, Physics Oxford, Queens Oxford, St. Edmund Hall Oxford, Wadham Oxford, Porstmouth, Queen’s Univ. Belfast, St. Mary College Belfast, Southampton, Southampton Solent, Strathclyde, Sussex, University College London, University East Anglia, University Senate London, Warwick and York. In Ireland there was a visit from Trinity College Dublin.

These include all the top ranked universities with interest in science except St. Andrews. The top ranked British Universities according to one recent measure are:

Cambridge, Oxford, Imperial, London School of Economics, Durham, St. Andrews, University College London, Warwick, Lancaster, Bath, Bristol, York, Edinburgh, Southampton, …………

This pattern of visits is repeated essentially all the time – so it is indeed accurate to describe ECE as the new unified physics. Its papers are gradually being published in the avant garde journal:

M. W. Evans, Ed., Journal of Foundations of Physics and Chemistry, (Cambridge International Science Publishing, CISP,, six issues a month, reduced subscription rates for individuals. We have enough material for about six years ahead, and about thirty invited reviews from leading specialists are in preparation.

The Times Higher Education top ten world rankings are currently

Caltech, Harvard, Stanford, Oxford, Princeton, Cambridge, MIT, Imperial, Chicago, Berkeley, ……

and the site has been in receipt of regular visits from the world top ten for nearly eight years. A complimentary copy of issue six of the journal will be sent to the top one hundred universities worldwide: the special issue on the refutation of Einsteinian general relativity.

cc Welsh Government

Advice about “Arthur Dent”

November 30, 2011

In view of the tremendous success of ECE theory shown by the latest record high feedback, I would not worry about “Arthur Dent” of Barry or wherever he is hiding. There are bound to be one or two people like this when there are order of millions of people reading the site in up to 116 countries in all the best universities.

November Feedback

November 30, 2011

The feedback just can’t get any better, so congratulations to all staffs! In view of this I think that the review article UFT200 is timely, and I will continue to work on it this week. Since 2008, the number of distinct visits per month to has doubled. Each distinct visit could be made up of many return visits, the system records a distinct visit only once. The essay broadcasts are a central feature of the feedback now, but from the daily report it is seen that the university sector studies the UFT papers, and sometimes listens to broadcasts. Literary Academies such as the Goethe Academy are also reading the site and listening to the essays and poetry. Only really new science and culture could unify humankind in this way.

November 2011 Feedback Activity for

November 30, 2011

This is found at the end of the attached file as usual, showing record high interest from the best universities, including many OxBridge Colleges and Ivy league Universities, and the best European and Worldwide Universities. It is known that this is interest from both staff and students.


Daily Report 29/11/11

November 30, 2011

UCC Sydney University: Concerns about Ethics, journal leaflet; IINet Australia UFT199; Institute of Technology for Development Brazil UFT8; Univ North British Columbia Canada UFT111; ETH Zurich UFT88; google sweep, yandex sweep; Jihlava Technical Univ Czechia UFT57; Gharibyna German Synchrotorn Facility UFT39; Siemens Company ECE Overview, 2D-ECE-FEM-1, Non Maxwellian Static Solutions; Vacuum Paper 2; infinite solenoid; Monmouth College Illinois Essay 27; Ohio State UFT25; ITAP Purdue: Double Slit; Univ South Carolina UFT88; Andalucian Institute of Earth Sciences Univ Granada crystallography laboratory Essay 11 (Spanish); Poitiers UFT198; International Institute for Theoretical Physics Trieste UFT4; Institute for the Foundation of Fundamental Research Amsterdam UFT29; National Institute for Subatomic Physics Amsterdam: Experimental advanatges of ECE theory over the standard model; Norwegian University of Science and Technology UFT166; New Pakistan University UFT175; Dept. Engineering and Computing Coimbra University Portugal: Phys Scripta; Univ Alexandro Ioan Cuzo, Iasi Romania: my CV; particle physics and high energy Lancaster Univesity UFT142; Univ Newcastle upon Tyne UFT143; Magdalen College Oxford educational note 2.

Today in the NYT

November 29, 2011

Our feedback shows that no one reads the New York Times any more. I think that these chocolate eaters (of whom I have barely heard) have lost touch with reality and cannot be recognized as scientists.

In a message dated 29/11/2011 18:59:01 GMT Standard

How Do Eminent Physicists Tackle the Higgs Boson? With Chocolate

Published: November 28, 2011

In 2005, at a festive midsummer night’s banquet at Uppsala Castle in Sweden, I chose a seat across the table from two of the world’s leading experts on particle physics: the theorist Frank Wilczek, the previous year’s winner of the Nobel Prize in Physics, and Janet Conrad, a leading experimentalist.

As the northern sun lingered late into the evening, they talked animatedly about the origin of mass. And that conversation led to a bet about an elusive, long-sought, much theorized particle, with me as the bet’s keeper.
Now, with the Large Hadron Collider up and running at a lab outside Geneva, we may be close to settling that bet.
The Standard Model of particle physics, which has passed one test after another, rests on the beautiful idea that the forces of nature arise out of symmetries, which imply certain similarities between particles. But particles actually differ, notably by having different masses. So one of these symmetries must be “broken.”
In the Standard Model, particles have symmetry-breaking interactions with a kind of pervasive molasses called the Higgs field that imparts mass to them. The stronger the interaction, the heavier the particle.
So, Dr. Wilczek argued that night, when two particles at the L.H.C. collide at almost the speed of light, they will occasionally create a detectable excitation in the molasses — a particle that is to the Higgs field what a tsunami is to the ocean. That particle, so far undiscovered, would be the Higgs boson.
Dr. Conrad grinned. “What if the L.H.C. doesn’t find the Higgs?” she asked playfully.
Dr. Wilczek, whom I’ve never seen without a smile, was unperturbed. As twilight deepened and candelabras cast flickering shadows on the walls, he noted that precision experiments on other particles had shown that the Higgs boson has a mass that falls well within reach of the Large Hadron Collider.
He talked about the various unresolved problems of the Standard Model, and the hypothetical theory called supersymmetry, which connects particles of matter, called fermions, with particles that carry forces, called bosons.
Conversations around us grew louder as the wine flowed. Many theorists thought supersymmetry had the most compelling answers to those unresolved problems, and most supersymmetric models predicted the Higgs mass to be in the narrow range of 115 to 130 GeV (a giga-electron-volt is a unit of energy or mass; 1 GeV is a bit more than a proton’s mass).
Thus a compelling argument could be made that the Higgs had to exist, that the L.H.C. would find it, and that its mass would lie in a narrow range.
Dr. Conrad knew all this, of course, but she was enjoying the intellectual fencing match. She argued simply that experiments could disprove a compelling theoretical argument.
So they made a bet. And since Dr. Wilczek had a compelling theoretical argument on his side, he was happy to give her odds of 10 to 1. If the L.H.C. finds the Higgs boson with a mass below 150 GeV, he wins 10 Nobel chocolate coins (the pinnacle of Hanukkah gelt); if not, Dr. Conrad wins 100.
Because I’m an editor for the journal that published the original paper by Peter Higgs in 1964, as well as some of the two contestants’ most important papers, they decided to make me the bet’s adjudicator.
Since then, the Large Hadron Collider has been completed and has performed an extensive array of tests of the Standard Model. And it began to search for the Higgs boson, supersymmetric particles and other hypothetical particles.
Over the summer, the collider’s first substantial cache of data had few hints of anything new, and it was able to rule out almost the entire mass range for the Standard Model Higgs boson above 145 GeV. Some news articles speculated that the Higgs might not be found after all. So should Dr. Wilczek be worried?
No, not yet. The L.H.C. has simply confirmed that the Higgs isn’t where we thought it wasn’t. The favored mass window is still open. And if the Higgs is even slightly nonstandard, almost none of its mass range has yet been ruled out.
But the batch of data being analyzed right now should search some of the favored mass region, and all of it should be examined by the end of 2012. So the bet is likely to be resolved soon.
If Dr. Conrad wins, theorists will be scrambling for alternatives. Either way, experiment will have the last word — followed by the chocolate course.
Robert Garisto is a theoretical physicist and an editor of the journal Physical Review Letters.

UFT200 Version Three Corrected for Minor Typo’s

November 29, 2011

This is version three corrected for minor typo’s.


Third Version of UFT200

November 29, 2011

This version shows how the review is progressing. All major advances are summarized in words and should be understandable easily by the general readership. These are very rapid, very significant advances made by the AIAS group. The profession has calmly accepted them as shown by feedback.