Comments by Horst Eckardt

Comments by Horst Eckardt

These are as usual very interesting comments, another approach to superluminal signalling.

The possibility of counter gravitation from m theory is an interesting aspect. Concerning Sean’s question of quantum entanglement, there is another argument. We have shown that longitudinal waves are solutions of the Maxwell-like field equations (mechanical and electrical). These waves are standing waves. Distortions of such waves are transduced simultaneously, not with the velocity of wave expansion. This mathematical fact is seldomly discussed. If we assume that each atomic nucleus establishes such a wave field as vacuum or spacetime waves, it can communicate with each other nucleus (or particle) simultaneously. Such a mechanism is propagated by some natural philosophy proponents but we have the means to describe it by ECE physics. The most astounding point for me is that such longitudinal waves only need one fixed point (the nucleus or antenna) while standard standing waves need two fixed ends to be established.


Am 05.11.2018 um 07:10 schrieb Sean:


These are all amazing advancements. The known laws of physics are being rewritten in comprehensive and self consistent manner while keeping true to the observables in nature not just to mathematical theories. As I ponder these discoveries 1 question comes to mind that links cosmology to particle physics. Does quantum entanglement use superluminal signaling perhaps through the spin connection to synchronize 2 photons, atoms or perhaps even larger groupings of elements and materials or rather is entanglement the same source of information being instantaneously shared across some universal step of time like multiple photons having an alias or reference to the same shared property that is simultaneously processed with each passing moment of time.

I think understanding which is the case will have profound implications and provide much clarity. Is entanglement a form of superluminal communication between separate particles or a single shared state with two linked particles? In computer terms an analogy would be say your mobile phone synchronizing data with a server such as your email provider to maintain parity as in the first case of superluminal communication, vs two computer variables referencing the same memory address to retrieve some piece of information such as X = Y both pointing to memory location 321Z in the computers physical memory. It may be that experiments will need to answer this question, but perhaps theory can bring clarity as well.

Keep up the amazing progress, the impact of your insights will be felt for generations to come.


On November 4, 2018 at 5:05:44 AM, Myron Evans (myronevans123) wrote:

Many thanks to the Co President! The mythical precision of the standard model no longer exists after the discovery of retrograde precession in the S2 star, and in the UFT papers multiple methods of developing and explaining cosmology have been proposed. The m theory has the great advantage of being able to use any m (r) function, and is capable of describing any astronomical data, including the velocity curves of whirlpool galaxies. The standard model is restricted to m(r) = 1 – r0/r, and this is incorrect due to neglect of torsion. A quick glance at Google will show that the books are doing very well, being on the first or second pages of Google for a good choice of keywords. For example “Principles of ECE volumes one and two” and “Criticisms of the Einstein Field Equation”.There has never been any valid criticism of ECE and ECE2, and the new m theory. This is simply because the theories are based directly on the well known Cartan geometry. ECE and ECE2 are generally covariant unified field theories and are therefore also Lorentz covariant. In the S2 star the standard model is out by a factor ten and gives the wrong sign of precession. The dogmatists are out on a limb, being locked into obsolescence. I am beginning to write the third volume of my autobiography, and that will expose all the early attacks as being due to the well known propensity of obscure mediocrities to attack new ideas in a mindless way.

418(5): A Summary of the New Classical Dynamics in m Space To: Myron Evans <myronevans123>

It is elegant and succinct – just as Einstein may have suspected was possible. His (or his not) well known equation now extended into the Evans/Horst equation can lie at the heart of this new physics for a long time to come.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.

%d bloggers like this: