Demonstrating the World Leading Impact of AIAS / UPITEC

This is best demonstrated by a table of page views per month per author (x) for the websites of each institute or university. In a university or institute an author would be a faculty member or post doctoral or post graduate student. So in the larger institutions there are thousands of authors compared with two active authors for AIAS / UPITEC. This table would put AIAS / UPITEC ahead of almost all the best universities and institutes in the world. It would be helpful to use Weblog 2.53 for www.upitec.org at some point in the future if that can be arranged without too much work. Then both Webalizer and Weblog 2.53 could be used for both sites. This measure of impact, x, can be added to all the others built up for AIAS / UPITEC. There is no reasonable doubt that it is the best institute in the world if measured by impact of research and distance teaching. Its ideas have changed physics entirely in fifteen years. The results of our work have been sent out all over the world, and they are avidly read in up to 183 countries. By now there is little or no professional criticism of ECE and ECE2, because it has been cross checked literally thousands of times using computer algebra, and compared with experimental data whenever possible. It is based on long accepted geometry due to the famous Cartan School in Paris. This geometry includes spacetime torsion. The www.aias.us and www.upitec.org websites have about four or five thousand items between them, so are far more detailed than nearly all the university and institute websites. The attached table of page views a month shows that AIAS / UPITEC is ahead of or comparable with any institution in Wales, and most of Britain, for example we are comparable with or ahead of the Welsh Assembly and Scottish Parliament. Prizes such as the Nobel Prize and Wolf Prize have been made obsolete by ECE theory because they are dogmatically reserved for the standard model. By building up nominations and applications we break down this obsolete practice. Prizes are nice, but of very little importance compared with the advancement of science. There are good things left about some parts of the standard model, but much of it is obsolete. One example is the GWS electroweak theory, (U(1) x SU(2)) and the Nobel Prizes awarded for that theory to Glashow, Weinberg and Salaam. The two Nobel Prizes awarded for the Higgs boson have also been made obsolete by conservation of antisymmetry, because this fundamental concept is missing entirely from standard physics, amazing as it is in retrospect. Higgs boson theory depends on a U(1) sector symmetry and massless particles, and that idea collapses when antisymmetry is applied rigorously (e. g. UFT131 ff.). How can all those scientists be wrong? Very easily. They are almost always wrong. The older generation is shown to be wrong or incomplete by the new generation, in any field of thought. So the obsolete is taught alongside the avant garde. It has always been like this.

COMPARATIVE_IMPACT_TABLE_IN_PAGE_VIEWS_PER_MONTH.PDF


%d bloggers like this: