Click ANY of these links to get what you want.
For the very latest in science, click links below:
c.squared.pdf 11-25-2017 (Adobe)
c.squared.doc 11-25-2017 (Word)
Daniel P. Fitzpatrick Jr. comments on the
Beliefs of Theoretical Physicist Mendel Sachs Ph.D
Some comments by Daniel P. Fitzpatrick Jr. this February 11th 2012
Here is Dr. Mendel Sachs' website . . Home . . Articles . . Cosmology . . Field Theory . . (Click any links here to get Dr. Mendel Sachs’ website.)
Theoretical Physicist Dr. Mendel Sachs' BELIEFS and a few of his words are in black - - Daniel P. Fitzpatrick's words in blue-green:
The primary purpose Mendel Sachs' states of his website . . Home. . is to generate dialogue in the physics community on aspects of a research program that deals with a paradigm change in modern physics.
Mendel suggests a paradigm change with quantum theory and general relativity. He thinks each of these two theories requires an incorporation of the other for its completion . . .
Absolutely right on this one, Mendel. I've shown, below on this page, that you are right with this belief and that both theories are absolutely necessary in today's science.
Mendel says it's been his assertion that Einstein, Schrödinger and Dirac were correct in searching for an explanation of quantum phenomena, not only their description.
Yes, Milo Wolff's wave structure of matter gives the best explanation.
Mendel believes that it is essential to resolve this problem of the dichotomy between the quantum and relativity theories before we can make any real progress in physics.
Use quantum theory for one quantum but field theories for more than one. (A separate parameter for each)
A quantum of energy is shifted between a pair of spin up - spin down electrons (Cooper Pairs) with no energy whatsoever lost between that pair as the energy is exchanged. BUT the number of these pairs is what diminishes inversely to the distance squared and this is what the field concept shows so use the field concept with multiple energy quanta.
It's only present science observers who see this dichotomy. There is no dichotomy here whatsoever, Mendel. In fact both are absolutely necessary to produce the noted amount we see as energy! This is because one quantum of energy, or one quantum of force as well, is being measured against the mean/average amount of out-of-phase space (a field). This is really a simple phase relationship that you and your ancestors have seen as either force or force times distance equaling energy. So you end up with a quantum measurement against a field measurement telling you both quantum and field theories are absolutely necessary until we get the supercomputers necessary that will do all the phase computing for this all frequency universe we are actually in.
Doctor Mendel Sachs has spent the past 35 years pursuing the field approach in general relativity. He thinks this is an ingredient in a unified field theory that Einstein and Schrödinger did not yet consider in rigorous terms. Mendel says it's essential to complete the theory.
Absolutely correct: The unification concept being that this is a frequency universe of spinning, scalar, standing waves all having one frequency, and having a lower spin frequency, making up one key of this grand universe piano with many of these spinning, scalar, standing wave keys. Again: strict parameters - field or quantum - for each but these piano keys are tied together - like in music - via their harmonics.
In the microcosm, macrocosm & perhaps ever more, this piano has many of these various (adinfinitum?) frequency harmonic, spinning, scalar, standing wave keys.
Professor Sachs says it's essential to resolve this problem of the dichotomy between the quantum and relativity theories before we can make any genuine progress in physics. He says, "Pretending that the problem does not exist does not help us to make real progress in physics!"
What is holding us up is that entire groups will not even talk to others at all: For instance, Astronomers - who know the speed of gravity is far, far faster than the speed of light - won't even talk to anyone who believes nothing can go faster than the speed of light.
We now know nothing can go faster than the speed of light in our realm but gravity emanates from the quark realm in which the speed of gravity travels the square of the distance - in one second - than the speed of light does. Van Flandern
Mendel talks about the recently discovered added acceleration of the expanding universe. He mentions Einstein's cosmological constant. He believes the same as Einstein who also thought that this addition to his field equations was his biggest mistake!
A bit of a disagreement here with Mendel Sachs on this one: I think Einstein's biggest blunder was in thinking he had committed a blunder. Einstein's cosmological constant made gravity a bi-polar force like the other forces and this is exactly what is needed. Not only that but by remaining with his cosmological constant, he could have even predicted this accelerating universe that the majority believe in today. Giving up his cosmological constant meant giving up Mach's Principle and this was a very bad choice indeed.
Mendel says 'dark energy' is only descriptive: it does not explain what it really is.
Absolutely right on target, Mendel!
October 6th, 2011
Dr. Sachs tells us about neutrinos that move at a speed greater than the speed of light. He does not reject the possibility that E=mc2 may be wrong but he says, "I strongly doubt it!"
I agree, but adding that E=mc2 is only true for atomic changes where quarks are involved. Where only electrons themselves are involved it is indeed true that the inertial mass of the electron adheres to the rules of special relativity: it agrees with the Hartree approximations. But free electrons, removed from the vicinity of quarks, do not conform to the E=mc2 rule. Quarks must be involved for that rule to apply.
February 27th, 2011
Posted in Articles
Again Mendel talks about the theory of relativity along with the quantum theory. He thinks each of these theories requires an incorporation of the other.
As I said previously I see no conflict here if both are used within their parameters, using quantum theory for one quantum and field theory for more than one quantum. In general relativity curved space equals force. Force is measured in quanta but space is distinctly a field measurement: it's the mean/average out of phase condition. It's really the mean out of phase condition but I'll use the word average in there too because many reading this won't know what the mean is.
May 10th, 2011 Posted in Meaning of Time general relativity
Sachs said he was delighted to read about the latest confirmation of the truth of Einstein's theory of general relativity.
No doubt Einstein was superbly correct with General Relativity. But remember this implies Mach's Principle which is only being given lip service by the majority of scientists today.
How about major paradigm changes that are coming? Dr. Sachs asks.
The most radical change will be the acceptance of the fact that a sigma bond that is really a bond between a pair of spin up - spin down electrons (Cooper Pairs), does not decrease with strength all the way to the Hubble Limit and there this ceases altogether. Dr. Milo Wolff was the first to alert me to the cessation of all electron bonds beyond the Hubble Limit. The fact that this bond holds its same strength all the way to the Hubble Limit can be ascertained by seeing that gyros hold to the surrounding stars. Simply do the math! The inverse square law would have some earth or sun or moon aspect showing up in gyroscope action if this law applied. There is absolutely NONE! There is only the 23 hour, 54 minute and 4 second rotation shown by gyroscopes, pendulums and vibrating elements - one sidereal day - or the time it takes this earth to make one rotation IN RELATION TO THE SURROUNDING STARS. So this makes it academic that the binding of each pair of spin up - spin down electrons between the gyroscope and stars are all of the same strength no matter the distance.
"Whenever a new theoretical approach, that is foundational in physics, is proposed . . . it is usually rejected by the establishment," Says Dr. Mendel Sachs.
"This stifles real progress in science," he adds.
You are absolutely right again: People tend to believe in their religion. Listen to what is being said today,"The science religion I believe in, and that all my friends also believe in, is the true science religion." The Catholic authorities would not even look through Galileo's telescope because they all knew the earth couldn't possibly ever move. Everybody could plainly see that it was the sun and stars that were doing all the moving. One church authority against Galileo said this,"If this earth is moving as fast as Galileo says it's moving then the wind would be so strong it would blow all the houses down."
January 27th, 2009
Physics, Quantum Theory quantum mechanics
Mendel talks about Heisenberg’s Uncerainty Principle.
Yes, but we are now - with Dr. Milo Wolff's Wave Structure of Matter - realizing that we must now CONVERT such things as momentum and position to what they really are in this wave world of phase relationships. And we have just begun to scratch the surface with this analogy! We now know what time is: it's the phase change of the spherical, standing wave itself. We know that space is the MEAN or average out-of-phase relationship of ALL the spin frequencies of these spinning entities. We now know that attractive force is when these entities are more in-phase than this average out-of phase space relationship. We also know now that repulsive force is when these entities are more out-of-phase than this average out-of-phase space. What we do not know yet is exactly what momentum and position really are in this new Wave Structured World. Once we find out then we will finally solve Heisenberg's Uncertainty problem.
December 24th, 2008
Mendel tells about the idea of wave-particle dualism.
Yes, We must use BOTH wave and particle systems that I explain in ABSTRACT (Click this link - it's FREE & no ads with it either.)
January 8th, 2012
Professor Sachs discusses in detail elements concerning the BIG BANG and what happens as our own sun cools down.
Yes, not only our sun but ALL the stars are converting ALL the elements into iron via both fission and fusion. Iron is the atomic energy ash heap. Iron is the only element that cannot be converted to atomic energy via fission or fusion. So even if Hawking is right and we do get away from this earth to planets like our earth far, far away and humans are able to survive for trillions of years in various spots and even in various galaxies, the end for the human race comes anyway when everything gets turned into iron and the lights (and heat) are all gone from this entire universe.
Fitzpatrick's First Book (FREE)
Read "Universities Asleep at the Switch" FREE in html.
Read "Universities Asleep at the Switch" FREE in ADOBE (slower to load).
Over 4 Decades of Fitzpatrick's Books, Papers & Thoughts: http://www.amperefitz.com/4.decades.htm
And here's this page duplicated in Adobe.pdf: