Georgina
Thanks for your kind comments, just 6,802,199,990 to go. (the right 6 would do!).
You're spot on of course, but the quicker we progress our learning the more chance we'll have of survival/deflecting the asteroid etc.
You're very perceptive. I had indeed got very frustrated that absolutely no-one wanted to even glance at the discovery, all our eminent(ish) physicists, peer review journals no-one! Actualy not true, you'll see above a handful have, the majority are supportive but not influential. A minority are scared of their reputation as it's a bit too off the ruling paradigm.
I've actually given up, twice. Sitting here sipping the Holy grail, while the human race rushes past on the way to it's own demise. It's only guilt and a sense of responsibility that keeps me going! Plus virtually every time I look at another scientific anomaly I find the simple answer staring at me from the chalice!
I need advice Georgina. From someone fresh to the Discrete Field Model. How can I present it in a way that the right people will notice and understand it?
I've been blogging for ages, and most have their noses firmly in their own agenda and, as you say, have no time to learn how to think differently. It seems the word 'inductive' means nothing these days, proof, and the 'scientific method' have little value. We're all crowded down unprovable dead ends entangled in superstrings.
Feynman was right. I think it was in 'The joy of discovering..' He modified Einsteins comment, saying effectively that not only would the right answer be unbelievably simple, but that it would initially appear so different as to be simply unbelievable. (I like that one, - I'll use it again!).
Please throw everything at me you can about the model. I discovered another 'prediction' today that'll need checking; That much of the spectroscopic profile of the 'cosmological background radiation' will match the frequency pattern from the 'photoelectrons' generated in the LHC, with a particular correlation at similar relative velocities.
And Equivalence; Do two photons floating in the vacuum have an equal right to claim they are at rest and it is the other in motion, when one is doing 0.9c in the LHC and the other is in a vacuum flask on top of the duct?
Only if we delude ourselves enough to ignore the crazy frenetic particle cloud around the first!
What is your own field?
What would be the way to most simply convince you?
What bits were you most skeptical about on first reading?
Do you need any more links (paper 3 below)
http://vixra.org/abs/1001.0010 Relativistic GPS Evidence and Quantum Gravity Architecture of the Discrete Field Model.
Best wishes
Peter
