Eckard,
I agree with Vladimir, you may well be the man to steer us through and out of the maze caused by current science as your essays path seemed anything but straight. I was expecting new ideas to avoid war and crimes against humanity. But I do applaud the concept that; "mankind as a whole can and must achieve a better command of Nature", which was my own theme (but developing a key proposals to do so).
A few points confused me, possibly typo's but I know how particular you are so must check;
Did time dilution contribute to no price being set for Relativity? Or was it the 'dilation' rationalised by Poincare and abused in SR that discouraged the 'prize'. The latter makes more sense, but then you analysis didn't. As it's only the physical 'signal waves' after emission by the clock that get dilated by normal Doppler shift, are you suggesting that somehow means "time" itself is being changed?
I ask that because you suggest that this 'co-ordinate' time cannot be measured, where of course it's the only thing we CAN 'measure' when clocks elsewhere are moving wrt us as they emit sequences. Proper time then remains properly the time from clocks in our own rest frame. I assume that's what you really meant as we just get c+/-v. If not (somehow you suggest v^2!?) do please construct the logic.
Your most important and valid point I think (in the science part) is that the; "Cosine transformation of measured data yields the same essential result as does the seemingly more general complex Fourier transformation." Which is precisely what I invoke to remove the 'weirdness' from QM. That import has not yet been assimilated into present paradigms. I've steered my yacht across the Baltic at night in a storm doing intuitive complex Fourier transforms in my head to anticipate the larger waves from the darkness. I find superposed cosine iPAD's more intuitive and predictable.
One thing I may dispute is critical logic telling us that in reality things don't 'change sign'. If you consider touching one hemisphere of a spinning ball, then rotating it's axis (or moving round it) and touching the other, we then find the sign reversed with each half rotation. You're not the only one to miss that little jewel of 'non-mirror symmetry' of spin. When Neils Bohr did so he consigned us to 90 years of wonderland physics equalled only by the insane banning of the fluid interstellar medium (as he thought it was 'fixed') by the chap from your way which he had those tiffs with at Solvay. We've m now found it ah gain but can't fit it into theory. Seems he was right about or stupidity.
The last thing, which surprised me a little, was your proposed solution to the population problem identified by Georgina, Allan Kadin, Judy Nab and others. Eugenics and the Chinese way don't seem to be solutions, nor leaving babies to die in the mountains as Judy reports was common. I can't see the answer you propose in your blog comments above; "Peace must definitely be avoided" to score highly, but it would certainly seem to do that job!
However my intuition says that too was a typo. If so I thought I'd better raise it or some may get the wrong idea. (But not bad in all for a 'foreign language'). (Thanks for not picking out any typo's in mine by the way).
I did respond to your interesting blog on mine, also a bit confusing I must admit.
Best wishes
Peter
