A Sop to Reality?

February 17, 2017

Book of Scientometrics Volume Two up to 15/2/17

February 17, 2017

In the first half of February 2017 there was the usual intense international interest, including interest from the following universities in the world’s top twenty (* denotes repeat visits): Caltech, Harvard*, Princeton, Penn State, Stanford, Texas A and M, Univ. California San Diego, EPF Lausanne, Cambridge and Imperial. There was also a visit from the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff at the Pentagon. Ivy League visits were from: Harvard, Dartmouth, Princeton and Stanford. Harvard and Stanford are often ranked the world’s number one. Essentially all the university visits were from the top two hundred or so, and this has been a steady pattern since 2003. The best in the world are open minded about new ideas and accept our distance methods of research and teaching. Otherwise they would not study our work, which consists of the development of a perfect unified field theory checked all the time by computer. Our work exists alongside the standard model of physics, and that is how it should be, that is how ideas progress.”

Forgetting for a moment the usual objections about why the other 98% of visitors should be interested in topics which, even if treated properly, would be ultra-nerdy to them. And forgetting that any such interest cannot be assumed to be positive. And forgetting that computer algebra cannot detect fundamental errors. Forgetting all of that, what’s with the highlighted sentence? We thought that the official stance was that ECE had entirely displaced the standard model and that only a few powerful ‘celebrity’ dogmatist modellers were forcing your followers to hide.  But if it ‘exists alongside’, that makes it even more difficult to explain why your ‘success’ is invisible to standard scientometrics.

Broadcasting Lies

February 16, 2017

Jimmy Carter and the Howard Johnson Patent

February 16, 2017

I think that Jimmy Carter, Nobel Peace Laureate, was one of the better Presidents and he was also a nuclear engineer. Douglas Mann in his paper mentions how he obliged the Patent Office to deal fairly with Howard Johnson.”

We have already pointed out that Carter was not a ‘nuclear engineer’: he was an engineering graduate who was later, as a minor part of his naval career, sent on a six-month course related to nuclear reactor use. That does not make one a ‘nuclear engineer’. He did not ‘oblige’ the patent office to do anything special for Johnson. The patent office publishes a huge number of crackpot inventions, so it would not have had any problem with accepting the Johnson rubbish. The patent office has a long history of itself employing perpetual-motion loonies, among them Thomas Valone. Effective presidential pressure would surely have resulted in the patent being granted. As mentioned before, Carter is the only president on record as being a  flying-saucer witness. Is that a recommendation? It probably is … in the lunatic fringe. Again Ron fails to report his part in the Johnson scam. But he is not the only incompetent ‘scientist’ to be embroiled in the racket: one also has to add William P.Harrison of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute, who co-authored a ‘paper’ with Johnson on the subject of the ‘magnetic motor’. Cranks like Mann think that the involvement of someone like Harrison elevates perpetual-motion into fact. All that it really does is to prove that academic institutions are often home to persons who should be in some other sort of institution. 

Brief Response

February 16, 2017

Daily Report 14/2/17

February 16, 2017

The equivalent of 80,587 printed pages was downloaded (293.820 megabytes) from 2,204 downloaded memory files (hits) and 474 distinct visits each averaging 3.8 memory pages and 6 minutes, printed pages to hits ratio of 36.56, top ten referrals total of 2,209,183, main spiders Google, MSN and Yahoo. Collected ECE2 650, Top ten 574, Evans / Morris 462(est), Collected scientometrics 314, F3(Sp) 179, Barddoniaeth 147, Principles of ECE 90, Eckardt / Lindstrom 70, Collected Proofs 54, Engineering Model 49, Autobiography volumes one and two 38, UFT88 36, UFT311 32, PECE 31, Evans Equations 30, CEFE 27, ECE2 24, Self charging inverter 22, UFT321 14, Llais 10, PLENR 8, UFT313 12, UFT314 11, UFT315 8, UFT316 10, UFT317 18, UFT318 9, UFT319 13, UFT320 9, UFT322 12, UFT323 8, UFT324 9, UFT325 12, UFT326 12, UFT327 11, UFT328 18, UFT329 15, UFT330 8, UFT331 12, UFT332 8, UFT333 13, UFT334 9, UFT335 10, UFT336 7, UFT337 8, UFT338 6, UFT339 6, UFT340 8, UFT341 13, UFT342 7, UFT343 10, UFT344 13, UFT345 9, UFT346 9, UFT347 7, UFT348 8, UFT349 11, UFT351 13, UFT352 16, UFT353 13, UFT354 17, UFT355 7, UFT356 16, UFT357 14, UFT358 8, UFT359 13, UFT360 9, UFT361 9, UFT362 12, UFT363 12, UFT364 15, UFT365 10, UFT366 24, UFT367 24, UFT368 26, UFT369 23 to date in February 2017. City of Winnipeg UFT papers; Deusu search engine spidering; Dartmouth College UFT107; Students Harvard University UFT213, AIAS staff, FAQ, CV, UFT107, table of differences; University of Texas Dallas UFT88; School of Industrial Engineering University of Valladolid Simulation parameters part two; Higher School of Medicine Mexican National Polytechnic University F3(Sp); Warsaw University of Technology general. Intense interest all sectors, updated usage file attached for February 2017. ”

Fake

Yet Another Loony Liar

February 16, 2017

FOR POSTING: New Paper by Douglas Mann

February 16, 2017

This is an explanation of the Howard Johnson magnetic motor with ECE theory. President Jimmy Carter personally saw to it that the Howard Johnson motor was patented.”

The (ughh) ‘paper’ is a  shoddy confection of half-truths, typical fare in the lunatic fringe of which the ‘Civil List Scientist’ is – sadly – a member. It is true that the Johnson patent was published in the US. But that is meaningless; all crackpot patents are published; that’s how we know about them, Duh! The important thing is that they are rarely granted. This is a huge distinction which cranks routinely skip over in order to fool the gullible (including investors). So, it was never granted in the US and that part is clearly a lie and Carter, loony-friendly or not,  is irrelevant. But it was granted in South Africa (we have an original in the group library) by particularly stupid patent examiners. The Jimmy ‘I saw a flying saucer’ Carter story is also deceptive. It is true that he graduated as an engineer, but his nuclear expertise amounted to a six-month (non-credited) course for navy personnel. What Ron surprisingly fails to mention is that the non-granted Johnson patent applications were the only ‘evidence’ justifying his notorious ‘magnetic motor’ theory paper which was accepted by idiot editors at Physica B. They also failed to query why his affiliation was a national treasury. Don’t worry, Physica will be receiving some flak later. So Ron’s Physica paper is another example of his theory ‘successfully’ explaining phenomena which do not actually exist.

Gyroscopic Incompetents

February 15, 2017

PS to Michael Jackson

February 15, 2017

The general theory has now been defined for any kind of lab frame torque, so we can thoroughly check by computer any possibility of violation of conservation of momentum. I do not think that there ever is. There is no violation of conservation of energy.”

It would definitely be proof of incompetence if there were any such violation. The Euler equations are predicated on the conservation laws (and consequently Newton’s third law) and so there cannot be any violation of them in the final result. That also immediately rules out any sort of levitation or propulsion effect … because that would imply energy or momentum from nowhere. Neither can angular momentum be magically converted into linear momentum. That would violate Noether’s theorem.

“Laithwaite was inexperienced in gyroscope theory, which is exceedingly intricate and very difficult for people to really understand,”

Yes he was, and so it is. And now you, in your ignorance, are making the same mistakes that he did. You clearly do not understand it either. It is a beginner’s error to think that the spin angular momentum vector coincides with the physical axis of a spinning-top, and yet that is what you seem to be assuming in your conversion schemes.

“but his experimental results were fine, they were replicated and used by NASA.”

They were not ‘experimental results’ at all: where did you learn experimental design? Aberystwyth? LOL. They were mere demonstrations, and deliberately dishonest ones at that. NASA certainly did not replicate and use his lying spinning-top demonstrations. Even NASA is not that stupid. NASA did invite him to design a launch-ramp for spacecraft (already a 100-year old Russian idea)  and he simultaneously set up a company to ‘develop’ non-existent gyroscopic propulsion possibilities. Such companies always fail … don’t they Ron.

“I condemn the people who ostracized Laithwaite and so has history. Other countries developed Laithwaite technology but Britain lost out completely as usual due to the disgraceful attitude that led to ostracization – an excess of arrogance.”

We condemn people who worship loud-mouthed incompetent grand-standers like Laithwaite and Tesla. Laithwaite completely distorted UK attempts at Maglev by promoting – as a ‘celebrity’ – schemes that would not work. It is a pity, given that maglev was invented by Maxwell. His theoretical explanation is a gem in its own right.  

Those ‘Death Threats’

February 14, 2017

“Multiple Threats Being Investigated by the Police

As a public figure I get a lot of threats and so on. These are a couple of typical “veiled death threats”, and typical of the behaviour of a predatory stalker as defined by the psychologist Mullen in a nineties study of stalker psychology. The South Wales Police have recently opened a second on going investigation in to these felonies. It is known that Waldyr Rodrigues, P. W. Atkins and a David Fisher of Zuerich are associated with activities of the stalker “Aaron Vee”, well known to the police. So they have self destructed as reputable scientists. I have advised the AIAS group to take suitable precautions. I am responsible for their safety as the AIAS President, and the buck stops here in the words of President Truman. If identified, Aaron Vee faces imprisonment. Threats such as these are serious felonies. This message is from a person who wishes to remain anonymous. All e mail addresses are removed from this blog with the exception of my own e mail address.

Physical threats of violence are being made against members of the targeted research group (drmyronevans.wordpress.com):

Death Threat One

“We look forward to the day when shooting crackpots at will is excused.”

Death Threat Two

“a .45 would have been very comforting… A word of advice, Alex: no point in having an impressive fence at the front if the fence at the back is weak. You really should replace that bent fence-post; an old mattress and, ole, any peon could have it away with your bug or pickup” (end quote).
Also, individual researchers are being stalked, and their personal information is being posted on a stalking website (occupation, pictures of business location, description of how to break into their buildings, what cars the researchers drive, etc).

The entire stalking blog is geared at harrassing a single researcher, with no other goal. The target of the threats and abuse is the physics researcher, Dr Myron Evans, who is a highly trained mathematician and physicist. His work is valid research, and he should not be a victim of arbitrary threats, abuse, and harassment, nor should his researchers have to live with stalkers who visit their employers, then post personal details on the web.
I will be happy to email a list of the threats, and evidence of stalking done by the stalking blog, and I will call to speak to an admin, if needed.
It is likely the stalking blog is being funded by certain vested interests, to discredit the new physics discoveries. In the interest of all mankind, please do what you can to stop the harrassment of real researchers, like Dr Evans.”

We have been puzzled for some time by your talk of death threats, but you refused to be more explicit, so we tracked them down for ourselves. As might have been predicted, the comments were taken out of context, conveniently garbled and were clearly tongue-in-cheek in the first place.  The first ‘threat’ was – to any reasonable person – obviously pure hyperbole, as when a stand-up comedian says something like, “I saw Jeremy Clarkson the other day … why does one never have a gun when it is needed?!” The other ‘threats’ all revolve around that shell of a building, located in a slum area of a one-horse Mexican town, which is supposedly the headquarters of a thriving perpetual-motion marketing company (Fortune-50 customers preferred):

My beautiful picture

 The ‘.45’ remark referred to the obvious personal risk of walking around in such an area and any implied ‘death threat’ would clearly have applied only to an assailant who was ‘asking for it’.   The other comments were clearly helpful security advice, and not threats: there were vehicles parked in the compound, and the back fence would have been easy to scale. Those innocent comments – fed through the distorting lens of the paranoid mind – become the cataloguing of personal details. A genuine business would be grateful for the free publicity!  As for involving employers, who was it who complained to Professor Bruhn’s university in the vain hope of getting him dismissed.  That would be you Ron. To conclude: this demolition of the claimed ‘death threats’ clearly knocks away the last foothold of Ron on any moral high ground. Do not continue to repeat this transparent ‘death threat’ calumny, Ron, or else! 

Still Reading Zero

February 14, 2017

Overwhelming International Acceptance of ECE Theory

February 14, 2017

One of the clearest indicators of overwhelming and complete acceptance of ECE unified field theory is that the average number of distinct visits a year to combined sites www.aias.us and www.upitec.org was 266,640 from 2009 to 2012 and 276,376 from 2012 to 2016. The main university interest is from the top two hundred or so in the world. Since ECE and ECE2 are so perfectly and objectively based on geometry, the only logical or constructive criticism must be based on criticism of geometry itself. ECE and ECE2 are highly imaginative variations on a theme, similar to J. S. Bach, “The Well Tempered Clavier” or the Diabelli variations of Beethoven. The bad parts of the obsolete standard model, are ingredients in a pig’s breakfast of unknowables, a variation on a theme of Pauli: not even crazy. The pigs ran “Animal Farm”, the thought police of “1984”. Not any more.”

There is no interest at all, and your ‘scientometrics’ are clearly contrived or misinterpreted. Can you not find just one conventional indicator to bolster your unlikely claim? We re-iterate: there is no independent referencing of ECE in reputable journals; there is not even any referencing of ECE by loony journals; there are no positive reviews (apart from Penderghastly’s) of your books; there is no interest in those YouTube videos of your views; nobody (reputable) sends you personal praise by e-mail; and nobody (sane) protests to us in your defence. Your incorrect differential geometry has been comprehensively torn apart,

http://www.mathematik.tu-darmstadt.de/~bruhn/MWEsErrors.html

and your only concept of ‘logical and constructive’ criticism was to have your then-friends at Telesio-Galilei set a lawyer on the expert mathematician who pointed out your incompetence:

fucillalegale2

You were Trump, even before Trump. He is haunted by fact-checkers, so are you. Get used to it.

A Test for Ron

February 14, 2017

Ron has ‘explained’ the apparent weight loss in the dishonest Laithwaite demonstration when, in fact, there is no weight loss, apparent or otherwise. But there IS a (largely forgotten) piece of classic scientific apparatus, almost as old as the gyroscope (but nowhere near as old as the spinning-top) which really does lose weight when it is operating. So get googling Ron, and try to find out what it is, before that forthcoming book reveals the answer … and notes that you did not.

Ever Decreasing Circles

February 13, 2017

Progress of ECE Theory

February 13, 2017

This is making excellent progress in all directions, the reason is that it is the perfect unified field theory, based rigorously on well known geometry, and developed at every stage with computer algebra and rigorous discussion. The ad hominem attacks of wikipedia have been long forgotten so I no longer report it daily. Its referrals are static and no one reads it. At hominem attacks will not stop its progress in any way, referrals to these attacks are essentially zero. These attacks are a matter for the police, not a matter of science at all.”

It is going nowhere, except in the deluded minds of its proponents. It is propped up solely by  the concocted ‘scientometrics’ and in fact attracts derision among the few real scientists who know about it … because it is aimed exclusively at a) ‘disproving’ Einstein b) ‘explaining’ perpetual-motion scams and c) supporting [pun intended] antigravitational levitation. These are all traditional ‘articles-of-faith’ in the lunatic fringe. The only useful purpose which the whole sad affair serves is to expose the poor understanding of physics among those who are ostensibly highly-qualified scientists: from the employee of a leading Germany technological company, to the ‘science officer’ of a Welsh county council; not to mention other hangers-on … including, on occasion, a former UK ‘spook’ who works in the ‘intelligence’ community. Perhaps the most distasteful aspect of the situation is the way in which the ringleader thinks that a scientific argument is a matter for the law. What sort of rational scientist would think that the pointing out of concrete scientific facts was some sort of crime? What sort of sensible scientist would put himself at judicial risk by backing quack cancer treatments, or by recommending that the UK Government should fund dubious ‘energy from nowhere’ schemes. Motes and planks. Motes and planks.

 

Dumb Dumb-Bell

February 13, 2017

Sketch of the Dumbbell Model by Horst Eckardt

February 13, 2017

This is most helpful and many thanks! It can be written up in UFT369 or UFT370, and is an incisive way of explaining Milankovitch cycles.”

You will not know this, not being physicists, and it would never occur to you to check the stability of your simulated solutions, but a ‘planar’ spinning-top is inherently unstable (see almost any work by Maunder). Carry out a perturbation analysis, and see. The ‘particulate top’ requires 3-fold symmetry.