All I am saying is that a definition is a definition. Where the chickens come home to roost is not with a variation of time or space by the atomic clock and c, it is with a variation of mass or some other property and that would reveal the true nature of reality. It does not appear that this nanowire experiment will have the precision to measure the decay of matter over several years.

Science fixes time and space by definition, but cannot yet measure mass variation with anyway near the precision of time as atomic frequency. Fixing time and space end up shifting all of the variability left to mass, but that variation in mass would still only be equivalent to 1 second in 64 years of equivalent time.

Precision measurements of mass over long periods of time either validate or falsify the notion of matter decay. Science is in a state of denial and dismisses its own measurements of matter decay as being due to systematic errors. Look, there are many sources for variability in measurements of time and mass. Science's current paradigm fixes time and space by definition of clock frequency and c, but science cannot fix mass with any greater precision than the equivalent of 1 second in 64 years.

The new watt balance weighs the energy of a superconducting current loop and may show decay of matter given 5-10 years of measurement. The LISA interferometer may also show this once launched into Lagrange 1 orbit this year. The very slow decay is a second dimension of time and that decay is not consistent with the current paradigm of mainstream science.

However, matter decay seems to show up in the IPK decay and the spin decay decay of the earth and the average decays of millisecond pulsars and just about everywhere I look. When I first got this notion of universal decay, I thought for sure there would be any number of measurements that would prove that matter does not decay. Alas, I have been unable to find any, but maybe I am wrong.

A universal decay is a fun concept, though, since it permits a moving frame to know how fast it is moving relative to the CMB. In a moving frame, although time and c do not appear to change, the measurement of matter decay does appear to slow down. Knowing the universal matter decay then tells the moving frame its absolute velocity.

This does not mean that relativity is wrong, just that the notions of GR are limited by our notions of continuous space, motion, and time. Matter decay is a notion that seems to augment the limitations of continuous space, motion, and time.

Dear Anonymous who I believe is Steve,

I appreciate your point of view even if we are directly opposite. On your notion of universal mass decay, my own hypothesis is that:

The Universe has been increasing in mass and radius from an initial zero value to its currently still increasing size at a rate 6.75 X 1026kg per metre change in radius, which also amounts to about 2.25 X 1018kg per second.

In other words after the Big Bang the mass of the universe was about 10-8kg which gives a model temperature 1032K.

If you believe at least superficially in the Big Bang, this hypothesis resolves the flatness, singularity and temperature problems in the standard model.

But as I said this is my own finding and I can only wish that experimental confirmation of your view proves me wrong.

All the best,

Akinbo

We are not so far apart it would seem.

A shrinking universe is much more consistent with attractive force of gravity and charge, but the fact of mass decay is one of dephasing while mass gain would be rephasing.

My universe is closed and bounded and so the limits of what we see are the limits of the universe. Since certain constants like c define the universe collapse, this changes the nature of the light cones that limit events in GR.

Actually, all that remains to validate a shrinking universe is more sensitive measurements to further validate the decay that has already been observed but dismissed as an artifact or an effect of tidal forces or gravity radiation.

...and to prove your universe, you do not have to disprove the current paradigm. All you need do is note that the current paradigm is necessarily limited by the notions of continuous space, motion, and time. Your expanding universe is presumably where force comes from and to get attractive forces from expansion, you need a phase factor, especially when you scale gravity and charge from the same expansion.

You seem to be especially focused on the nature of light as a transverse mode in space. But light does not exist without both a source and an absorber just as charge and gravity do not exist without at least two objects. We imagine force fields in an otherwise empty space as a convenient representation of object interactions, but it is the exchange of matter that determines action.

Light is likewise simply a representation of the bonding action between two objects that we conveniently represent as isolated photons. Although imagining light as an isolated photon or as an isolated wave is a very useful simplification of reality, that simplification does not apply at either very large or very small scale.

16 days later

I like to explain the way the universe really is...

Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 18, 2015 @ 15:15 GMT as "Can you please explain me your universe, I d like to know more, it seems relevant."

I have both technical and less technical descriptions. I presume you are less technical and so try these links:

Aether Time

What Is Time

What Is Matter

What Is Action

It turns out that as I discuss the universe, my notions evolve and I rewrite these blogs to reflect any updated notions.

Hello Steve A.,

Thanks , it is interesting, I am wishing you all the best in your works.

I like personnally the generality of our Universe,they turn so they are these spheres inside a bautiful universal sphere.It exists a central sphere inside this universal sphere.The quantum world is in the same logic.

Best Regards.

It is a quite beautiful association of the spin pair that we call charge force with the ultimate spin pair of universe that we call gravity force. Earth's spin and Sol and our galaxy and galaxy cluster and a large scale structure are all spinning bound to a complementary large scale structure and galaxy cluster and galaxy and star and planet with complementary spin.

The microscopic spin pairs of quantum charge and the cosmic spin pairs both began in the the fluctuations of the cosmic microwave background and both reflect the beauty of a universal aethertime force.

5 months later

Dear Carinne Piekema,

Thanks for presenting the work of Keith Schwab. Making good experiments is hard work.

It keeps the rest of us honest.

Here are some ideas for Keith:

1. It is possible that your vibrating wire is producing EM radiation (aka light) at a wavelength of about 0.3 meters. Get a ham radio receiver set it to detect 0.3 meters and take a look. I am very suspicious that gravity waves due to accelerations may actually be light.

2. I also suspect that general relativity is correct and at the same time incomplete. I have reason to believe that the standard model of the graviton will complete gravity theory. Check out this link: http://www.digitalwavetheory.com/DWT/17_Making_a_Case_for_the_Graviton.html

4. I believe some of the best work on gravity is being done via the current work on neutrino detectors check out: http://www.digitalwavetheory.com/DWT/38_Neutrinos_and_Gravity.html

3. If the links interests you can get a better overview of my work via the index: http://www.digitalwavetheory.com/DWT/Index.html

Thanks for doing the hard work.

Don Limuti

    Hi Don and Ms Piekema,

    I agree totally with you Don, I don't think that we can analyse the gravity in the logic of our standard model and heat and thermo and electromagnetism.The gravitons are not really relevant and foundamental because they are bosons.The gravitation is the weakest force considering the encoding of informations.If the spherical volumes are an universal key linking the quantum scale and the cosmological scale, so it becomes relevant.Theproblem is how to see them,I named them the spherons.How to check them,to analyse them ....They are so small and speed these partiles encoded in our nucleis.The QFT and the QED must be renormalised in inserting the gravitation but with a different logic that said.If the quantum of gravitational energy is different than a quantum of actualthermodynamical energy, so it becomes relevant.The mathematical methods can be applied but with the biggest relativity about enetropy.The gravitons are not rational in fact simply.The BH and dark matter are correlated.The spherical quantum and cosmological volumes can answer in fact.It is the same with c, a boson cannot ,but a spheron, particle of gravitation, in logic if my équations are correct, can.Neutrinos are bosons, gravitons also, gravitation is not a boson.They aree encoded in our nucleis in a kind of dark quantum matter where there the volumes increase towards the singularity.

    Hi Steve,

    Thanks for your comments. I would rephrase your last sentence to read neutrinos are bosons when they act as gravitons. I have followed deBroglie off the deep end, and also believe that neutrinos are fundamental to light where they move in such a way that they are not bosons.

    There is geometry in the humming of the strings, there is music in the spacing of the spheres, and there's life in math! Pythagoras

    Don Limuti

      Hi Don,

      You are welcome.The neutrinos are bosons and are probably correct ,that said , the graviton in my line of reasoning, no.Gravitation is different it seems to me humbly.We live indeed Inside a beautiful universal music of improvement.....They turn, they dance, they polarise, they evolve, they sing these rotating sphères.The partitioning is relevant....

      Best Regards

      a year later

      EXPERIMENTAL quantum Anti-gravity -- https://quantumantigravity.wordpress.com

      I have made a theoretical as well as an empirical scientific discovery

      of quantum gravity and quantum antigravity.

      Present day quantum gravity theories suffer from

      too many mathematical space dimensions, and from

      too few conclusive experimental results.

      My hypothesis is simple, clear,

      and subject to easy empirical verification :

      https://quantumantigravity.wordpress.com

      Should you have any questions or need clarification,

      I am more than happy to answer.

      7 months later

      WARNING to FQXi community about the post of the above advertisement!

      This looks benign, but it is from a host that will insert a protocol that they will then want to sell you "service" to protect you from. About a month ago, I had a warning pop-up that lead to just such an alleged tradename Microsoft support number which I foolishly called which connected with an individual who had so thick an Indian accent that it was difficult to understand, yet called himself 'Dave Smith'. I went along with it until he repeatedly 'informed' me that I just had to allow him to install a patch and kept trying to evade my question of why should it cost me anything if he were really with Microsoft. I even informed him that I don't do any electronic banking, and he persisted in trying to sell me a 'security upgrade'. So I clicked back through a couple of the window pop-ups until I found one that had an 'END' box and shut him off. He protested on the phone that I really really needed him to have administrative command of my computer, and I said 'goodbye'. I have since received two phone calls from him, one from a different number. Then just the other day immediately after the monthly real Microsoft update, My screen locked up and my computer would not shut down. So I have spent the last two days, going to my hardcopy references and using keyboard inputs til I found a few that would activate, and only this morning have I been able to get back online. So please beware, everyone, the Information Highwaymen are at large. And If you hadn't noticed, There is nobody minding the store at FQXi, there have been daily repeated reportings of inappropriate posts from obvious bot advertisements and no blocking protocols have been installed. I have not gotten even a reply acknowledging receipt of an email to the managing director complaining about the failure of FQXi to monitor the numerous reports. AND there is no "unsubribe" option anywhere on the webpage. We are all hostage to what is apparently a money pump for a privileged few that operates FQXi as a means to pass through a tax shelter for corporate donors. And if you don't want to believe it, then why won't there be any response to this from any of the FQXi 'administrators'? John R. Cox

      To John and others lured in by such offers...

      My dad fell prey to this 'Microsoft Tech' ploy, while I was on vacation. It was insidious, how deep they dug themselves in. They even placed xpi files in the system folder of Mozilla Firefox, to re-direct any attempt to use other than their default (user monitoring) search page. I was able to find and remove same, by searching for files changed since the hack, and being sure to include all hidden and system files in the search. I then booted the machine from the ESET system recovery disk (you don't need to be a customer) and had the program remove all infections it found.

      It is possible to recover full control over one's machine by going to tweaking dot com, and downloading the 'All-in-one Windows repair,' then following the directions. You may not need to use the full gamut, but be sure to click 'reset permissions' and 'restore important Windows services.' This program is safe to run even if all functionality appears intact, and I run it periodically to make sure that I always have full permissions to access all the content on my own machines. It is a bugger, when someone can lock you out.

      Don't be too harsh on FQXi. I think they are hit as hard by the funding crunch, and as much as other sectors in the Sciences, but need to keep up appearances - in order to continue to receive funding. Go figure...

      All the Best,

      Jonathan

      Good Luck!

      Jonathan