Testing Times for Nature's Constants

Dr Huang, Have you tried submitting your paper to www.arxiv.org, so that other physicists can access it easily, while it is awaiting publication?

Hello dear Steve,

Thank you let me come here.

I am sorry, I do not know how to made a new post.

Best wishes

Xinwei Huang

Hello dear Anonymous ，

Yes, I have done. However, arxiv not allowed to express anti-relativity paper.Therefore, I had to through the Internet to publicize the paper.

Best wishes

Xinwei Huang

Hello,

You are welcome.

I think Fqxi can help you for the post.

Best wishes too , and like says a friend "Have fun"

Steve

Why is it we cannot observe an Electron, but can assign it a charge value? Rubbing two different structures together creates charge, is it the Electrons pushing out the charge or is it pulling in the charge?

I think the problem lay in frictional charge being more applicable in the distant past Universe, Electrons fighting thier way in and out of compressed matter would aquire certain charge values, in an ever expanding Universe all forms of friction decreases?

Dear friends,

we can not test time in the universe as universe is timeless. X 4 = i x c x t is spatial too. Galaxies, stars, we human beings and sub-quantum particles move in space only and not in time. Time is run of clocks in timeless universe. There is no physical time behind the run of clocks. We measure with clocks material change i.e. motion of the timeless universe. We experience material change i.e. motion through the inner linear psychological time "part-present-future" that is based on neuronal activity of the brain: we "see" all running in time although we can not perceive time in the universe, we c an perceive only change i.e. motion.

See more on articles attached.

Yours AmritAttachment #1: Physical_Time_Is_Run_Of_Clocks__Quantum_Dream.pdfAttachment #2: Observer_is_a_function_of_Fourdimensional_Timeless_Space__for_WEB.pdf

If time is defined by the period of rotating charge,

then synchronicity is defined by efficiency

of charge transfer.

Charge transfer efficiency can be shown

to be optimized by golden ratio perfected

fractality, in the form of phase conjugation.

My original Equation evidence at

www.goldenmean.info/coincidence

Planck time - times golden ratio predicts:

hydrogen

solar year

venus year

!

fractality in time..

Summaries at

www.goldenmean.info/selforganization

The experiment:

show that charge transfer between oscillating

capactive circuits increases slightly

when they are place at

golden mean ratio IN TIME!

Significant evidence of the golden mean

ratio at the root TIME

in link 1 above

and at the root of quantum physics

in link 2 above

dan winter

danwinter@fractalfield.com

Isn't 10E-17 good enough precision?

Well, maybe 10E-23 is better, but the first is good enough to me.

In terms of where to seek change in alpha; I'd guess that it will be out of the planetary plane: one satellite did go there, but no anomalies were reported as far as I know. Go North!

- Tim

"In many theories, the Sun perturbs the values of the constants by a factor roughly proportional to the Sun's Newtonian gravitational potential, which scales as the inverse of distance, r, between the Earth and the Sun. Since r fluctuates annually, reaching a minimum at perihelion in early January and a maximum at aphelion in July, the values of the constants, as measured here on Earth, should also oscillate in a similar seasonal manner." - D.J. Shaw and J.D. Barrow,

The internet has made it possible to now bring under scrutiny more of those privileged documents used by the establishment to discountenance logical new proposals by quoting sections of documents that hitherto only they have access to. The definition of a second, depends on the frequency of Caesium 133, see 2.1.1.3 and the BIPM says in section 1.5 that by some mechanism gravity can influence frequency.

I have posted on the "Q&A with David Rideout: Testing Reality in Space" blog on the discordant statements and implications for our physical theories so no need repeating here. Now, from the paper by J.D. Barrow and D.J. Shaw, excerpts of which I quote above, the question arises:

1. Whether in view of the annual change in the Earth-Sun gravitational relationship, there can similarly be an annual change in the "second" as defined?

2. Since gravity slows light according to General relativity, and the Sun's slowing of light transit-time over a given distance has been verified by experiment, if GR is sacrosanct, will the light transit-time over one metre distance on Earth be slower in early January and faster in July when solar gravity is at a minimum?

3. Although, D.J. Shaw and J.D. Barrow shy away from the question being adherents of General relativity, preferring instead to concentrate on the fine structure constant, it is now an open secret that the value of light velocity is no longer sacred and their own paper suggests that it can similarly vary due to gravitation influence. My value for co in flatter, gravitationally freest space-time is 299,792,458.2087m/s, is slightly higher than the c 299,792,458m/s measured under the Earth's gravitational influence, in accordance with Equation 3 in Einstein's paper here.

Akinbo

*More later...