Archive for November, 2013

Autobiography Volume Two arrived safely

November 30, 2013

Pleasure! I am very glad it arrived safely before the Christmas rush. I have twenty or so more copies here for relatives, friends and colleagues.

In a message dated 30/11/2013 16:57:29 GMT Standard Time, writes:

Yes, Myron, thank you, it just arrived. I was like a kid at Christmas when I opened it. The book looks real good. The printers did an excellent job. I look forward to a last afternoon today or tomorrow so that I can sit down and enjoy reading it.
Thank you again.

On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 10:13 AM, <EMyrone> wrote:

Did the book arrive safely? If not it may be due to “printed matter”.

Cross Check by Horst Eckardt of paper 252, section 3

November 30, 2013

Here Horst uses the Virial Theorem to cross check the results, finding correct results. All ECE work is repeatedly cross checked like this, and checked with computer algebra.

Sent: 30/11/2013 14:37:17 GMT Standard Time
Subj: PS: paper 252, section 3

PS: I checked the calculations by the virial theorem which holds for
non-relativistic quantum mechanics:

2 <T> = –

T = hbar / (2m) * nabla
U= – 1/(4 pi epsilon0 r)

in atomic units (hbar = m = e = 4 pi epsilon0 = 1) the result for s
states (to avoid angular parts of T) exactly gives

<T> = 1/2
= – 1

<T> = 1/8
= – 1/4

<T> = 1/9
= – 1/18

which is correct.


Am 30.11.2013 14:41, schrieb Horst Eckardt:
> Although the results of calculating the expectation values look short
> and simple, it took a certain effort to produce the numbers and build
> up the tables (but I liked doing it for our outstanding and original
> research).
> I am a bit surprised about the huge energy splittings resulting from
> E1 and E2. These are much larger than the orbital energies. I think we
> should check this. The factors are those of (double of) the kinetic
> energy (eqs. 25 and 26) but the operator 1/r^2 seems to enlarge the
> result considerably. I am not sure if this is realistic or if we made
> an error anywhere. Or does this tell us that the mixed
> function/operator method does not work in certain cases?
> Horst

FOR POSTING: paper 252, section 3

November 30, 2013

This is excellent work by Horst as usual, producing entirely original results for quantum mechanics. It may be that some of the predictions of the mixed operator / function representation are unphysical, and this is a line of research that should be of basic interest to quantum mechanics, both ECE and standard. Currently there is no understanding of why an operator rep works (as in the g factor of the electron) and why a mix rep works (as in spin orbit coupling). Horst has put in a very large amount of work into these papers, all done voluntarily from a busy schedule.

Sent: 30/11/2013 13:41:37 GMT Standard Time
Subj: paper 252, section 3

Although the results of calculating the expectation values look short
and simple, it took a certain effort to produce the numbers and build up
the tables (but I liked doing it for our outstanding and original research).
I am a bit surprised about the huge energy splittings resulting from E1
and E2. These are much larger than the orbital energies. I think we
should check this. The factors are those of (double of) the kinetic
energy (eqs. 25 and 26) but the operator 1/r^2 seems to enlarge the
result considerably. I am not sure if this is realistic or if we made an
error anywhere. Or does this tell us that the mixed function/operator
method does not work in certain cases?



Report on LENR from Swedish ELFORSK

November 30, 2013

Many thanks to Axel Westrenius! I ran it through Google Translate and read through its main details. It is a long and detailed report. It mentions Rossi’s E Cat, Defkalion’s Hyperion and Brillouin Energy as the leading contenders. It mentions ECE in a fair way as a theory that shows the inadequacy of the standard physics and mentions UFT230. I am not sure that they understand that in UFT226 to UFT231 we explained LENR with quantum tunnelling without yet going beyond the Schroedinger equation. In the next stages of our theory we will use spin connection resonance, which as you know does not exist in the standard model. The latter has been refuted to the satisfaction of literally millions of readers, so is not useful in my opinion. All these ECE LENR papers and notes have been heavily studied and ALL are in Google Scholar. However the report mentions that no replication of LENR has been made. This is surely out dated by now because Toyota for example have replicated a Mitsubishi LENR device. There have been many several independent replications of LENR. Otherwise I would not have applied ECE to LENR. The report mentions that there are 1,700 refereed papers on LENR. The ECE papers are refereed by the readership. Obviously the readership (i.e. the colleagues) accept ECE papers in droves.

Subj: Report on LENR from Swedish ELFORSK

ECE is mentioned in note 6 on page 7.

Dear Myron et al,
ELFORSK ( has just released a report on LENR (attached). Unfortunately, there is only a summary in English. You may be able to get Google to do a reasonable translation of the full report. I will try to find out if a full English version is or will become available.

Kind regards,



The World is Definitely Flat (Spike Milligan)

November 30, 2013

Any standard model Admiral knows that the world is flat and made up of dark matter, so they can safely ignore a huge amount of criticism inferred by the huge amount of interest in ECE. Masts get shorter on the horizon because they are being chopped down for fuel, even though a sailing ship does not have an engine. “Waiter, waiter, there’s a fly in my boson”, Waiter dives on to the table and all collapse in laughter (google youtube and Spike Milligan, who staggers off the set). Also all are referred to Pink Panther out takes, which of course, do not exist, neither does youtube.

Sent: 30/11/2013 09:31:55 GMT Standard Time
Subj: RE: CONFIDENTIAL: Overall Activity Report (Full Lists): AIAS

Fantastic – how the interest can be doubted is beyond belief.

This is the file that is overwritten at the end of each month. As can be seen the total interest is absolutely overwhelming. I go through this entire file twice a month and the filtered result is the Book of Scientometrics.

Learning Cartan’s Geometry

November 30, 2013

I am very pleased to hear this, someone in a Department of Economics doing the learning work that standard physicists should be doing. There is a glossary of a kind in the attached book by Lar Felker. The first three chapters of Sean M Carroll are good too. Review papers UFT100 and UFT200 may also be useful as a guide, and also the ECE Engineering Model and some excellent work by the AIAS colleagues. A short glossary is given as follows.

1) The tetrad postulate is the requirement that the complete vector field be independent of the way in which it components and basis elements are described. This is very fundamental. In ECE theory all the wave equations of physics emerge from the tetrad postulate, including all of quantum mechanics minus the Heisenberg indeterminacy.
2) The first and second Cartan structure equations define the torsion and curvature respectively as vector and tensor valued two-forms of differential geometry:

T = D ^ q; R = D ^ omega

In ECE theory these define the relation between fields and potentials. They can be translated into the Riemannian torsion and curvature. The Riemann torsion and curvature are both given automatically and simultaneously by the action of the commutator of covariant derivatives on a vector or more generally a tensor of any kind and any rank in any dimension. If the Christoffel connection is symmetric both the curvature and torsion vanish because the commutator vanishes. So in order for the Cartan structure equations to produce a finite torsion and curvature, the Christoffel connection must be antisymmetric in its lower two indices. This inference refutes the entire twentieth century thought in general relativity. GENERAL RELATIVITY MUST INCLUDE FINITE TORSION.
3) The Cartan identity is

D ^ T := R ^ q = q ^ R

and in ECE theory defines half of the field equations of gravitation and electromagnetism. The Evans identity is:

D ^ T tilde := R tilde ^ q = q ^ R tilde

and defines the other half of the field equations in four dimensions. The Evans identity holds only in four dimensions, but the Cartan identity holds in any dimension.
4) Elie Cartan’s original geometry has been greatly developed in many directions by mathematicians, not least among whom was his son, Henri Cartan. Obviously they all accept the correctness of Cartan’s original geometry. This is so obvious that it hardly needs to be written down. Within its definitions, Cartan’s geometry is rigorously correct and self consistent. For example I have shown that in tensor notation the Cartan identity is exactly correct, one side is exactly the same as the other.

Many of the UFT papers show how the form notation is translated into tensor notation and then vector notation for engineers. Everything in ECE theory is based on Cartan geometry, whose correctness is very well known. I have broken out the proofs in all detail to help the readers and give much more detail than Sean Carroll, who himself gives an exceptional amount of detail. Any “attack” on Cartan geometry is total utter nonsense, as in the wikipedia article written by enemies of mine. I have no idea why this anomosity developed, that is their problem, not mine, or Cartan’s. Incidentally, in a letter to John B. Hart, Sean Carroll accepted ECE as a plausible theory. As for any theory, it must be tested against experimental data. Since it produces all the equations of physics (at least the correct ones), it has passed all its experimental tests so far. Curently I am making a whole series of new predictions of the fermion equation with Horst Eckardt.

In a message dated 29/11/2013 18:43:34 GMT Standard Time, writes:

Dear Myron. I agree you should encourage nascent students, and I especially agree with your comment on your current technical abilities. This is something I have noticed in myself, having been “forced” back through the differential and integral calculus and matrix algebra for my studies, and now enjoy and teach them at high levels. Regarding Cartan geometry, I have been reading your work for many years now, and convinced myself without great depth of understanding that your maths were right.

So, to deepen my understanding, I am learning Cartan-based differential geometry using a nice little (but rigorous) Dover book. And it is not difficult.

So, to the Colas Chabauds of the world, enforce the necessity of Cartan differential geometry. The only thing I feel I am missing at this point, so am committed to build, is a glossary of relevant operators and functions (unless I have missed that in all your work).

Very best,

Steve Bannister


Posting the Latest Version of the Book of Scientometrics

November 30, 2013

I would like at ask Dave to post the latest version after it has been completed tomorrow. Many thanks in anticipation. Then it will be archived for the fifteenth time on 9th Dec at the British Library in London. By now it is a centrally important document in the history of science, showing how the standard physics was refuted and replaced by ECE physics as the leading new thought of the twenty first century. This was anticipated by the eminent editor Prof. Emeritus Alwyn van der Merwe of Denver University, who described it as the Post Einsteinian Paradigm Shift. It was also anticipated by the late Prof. John B. Hart of Xavier University, and Prof. Bo Lehnert of the Royal Swedish Academy. Also by many others.

Book of Scientometrics Updated to 29/11/13

November 30, 2013

This is sent out as usual on the last day of the month before the relevant file is overwritten. To date in November 2013 for there have been 71,589 hits, 16,584 distinct visits, 49,331 page views, 2,689 documents read. Tomorrow as usual I will complete the results for and add the results for and A usual all UFT papers and essays were read or heard, and most of the other material also read. As usual there is an impressive list of leading universities from around the world. So AIAS is the world’s number one consulting institute for new thought in physics.


Daily Report 29/11/13

November 30, 2013

There were 1,973 hits from 484 distinct visits, 31.3% spiders from baidu, google, MSN, yandex and seznam. Auto1 194, Auto2 66, Evans Equations (English) 115, Evans Equations (Spanish) numerous; Book of Scientometrics 81, CEFE 39, Autosonnets 11, Englynion 10 to date in November 2013. Argentine National Commission for Atomic Energy Bariloche Centre F3(Sp); University of Quebec Trois Rivieres general; Fraunhofer Institute for Nondestructive Testing Dresden UFT238-b; Karlsruhe Institute for Technology Steinbuch Centre for Computing (on edu) UFT157; University of Granada Essay 48(Sp); University of Poitiers general; University of Rome 3 levitron; Fowler Public Schools Michigan UFT papers; Hallmark Health general; City of Novosibirsk UFT107; Physical Chemistry Royal Institute of Technology Sweden Essay 35, AIAS staff; National Chin Yi University of Technology Taiwan UFT107; Wadham College Oxford UFT88; School of Mathematics and Physics Queen’s University Belfast UFT57; University of Wales Swansea UFT85; Chemistry Warwick University UFT238b. Intense interest all sectors, updated usage file attached for November 2013.

Usage Statistics for

Summary Period: November 2013 – URL
Generated 30-Nov-2013 00:15 EST

Minor Erratum in paper 252

November 29, 2013

Many thanks again to co author Dr. Horst Eckardt.

In a message dated 29/11/2013 17:53:17 GMT Standard Time, writes:

Obviously in eq.75 the integrand should read

psi* 1/r^2 dpsi/dr.