SEE, — HOW the complexities of
FIELD THEORIES HID from us, the fact that relative motion (phase) between all these spinning entities, in the micro & macro universe, gives us all the attractive and repulsive Fundamental Forces.
Oct-29-2018.
Field Theories in html: http://rbduncan.com/fieldtheory.html

Also, Field Theories in Word: http://rbduncan.com/fieldtheory.doc

& Field Theories in Adobe pdf: http://rbduncan.com/fieldtheory.pdf

Fitzpatrick's 1966 book showed the relative motion laws of A. Ampère unified the forces.
Fitz's first book in 1966

Fitz's 1966 book in PDF


EVERYTHING on these links herein are FREE, & NO pop up ads with these either.


This was the way the site --below-- looked many years ago. - - Dan Fitz.



Feynman's QED

Throwing a bit more light on

R.T. Cahill's Quantum Foam theory

Click these links below for this IMPORTANT UPDATE TO THE MUCH, MUCH FASTER SPEED OF GRAVITY THAT CAHILL RIGHTLY ASSUMES.

 

I accept the mathematical proof of T. D. Martin that clearly shows the underlying flaw in Reginald T. Cahill's Quantum Foam theory

http://www.gravityresearch.org/pdf/GRI-030810.pdf

however

R. T. Cahill does begin with two assumptions that are clearly correct:

 

  1. He has the speed of gravity down correctly.
  2. This is important because today half the scientists believe in one speed but the astronomers all believe in the faster speed that Cahill assumes.

     

    The speed of light is 3x108 meters per second. The problem with a 3x108 meters per second gravitational speed is that it is far too slow for astronomers because they all know that with this slow speed of gravity, our universe can't be stable.

    Tom Van Flandern, cited by Cahill, showed that since gravity had no aberration and light did, then the speed of gravity had to be much, much faster than the speed of light and almost an instantaneous velocity. This was Newton's assumption as well.

    In my e-mails to Tom Van Flandern, before he died, he agreed that a gravitational velocity of instantly or at least 20 billion times the speed of light (2x1010c) was an acceptable velocity as far as the astronomical group was concerned because at this velocity the universe would indeed be stable and this speed would also give gravity no aberration.

    Tom Van Flandern did not like the term c2 at all saying, "You cannot square a speed!"

    But nevertheless a speed of at LEAST (2x1010c) is 20 billion times the speed of light


    A speed of gravity, astronomers can live with, therefore, is either INSTANTLY or at the very least (2x1010c)

    A velocity of (2x1010c) is an almost instantaneous velocity that is the lowest possible velocity that the astronomical section of Van Flandern's Yale University; most other astronomical departments in other universities and Van Flandern would accept.

     

  3. Cahill assumes the surroundings, in the background, are affecting our gravity. This too is absolutely correct. This is Mach's principle. But the problem with using this background data is that until you understand exactly why these spiral galaxy arms are exceeding their escape velocity then you must not depend on the accuracy of this background data because there is simply more happening there that you are still not aware of at this present time.

 

 

Even though T. D. Martin gave Reginald T. Cahill a failing grade, I'm giving his efforts a Shakespeare era rating of "passing fair" because Cahill's thinking is far ahead of the affenstahl group that dictates our present science beliefs: He is indeed correct on these two important points that I've pointed out herein. R. T. Cahill is one of the very few today who can actually think.

 

For more about where this quantity c2 is coming from see: http://www.amperefitz.com/assymfree.htm

 


VERY LATEST IN SCIENCE: Do Ampere's Laws give us the final answer to DARK MATTER?

7-7-2017.The final answer to the cause of Dark Matter.htm

Final and SIMPLE answer to the DARK MATTER attractive force.

In Word: 7-7-2017.Answer to DARK MATTER.doc

7-7-2017 Answer to DARK MATTER also in Adobe.pdf - 7-7-2017.Answer to DARK MATTER.pdf




Be sure to read: http://www.amperefitz.com/acceleratingexpandinguniverse.htm

See this short, clear picture: http://www.amperefitz.com/principle-of-equivalence.htm

Also http://www.amperefitz.com/aphaseuniverse.htm

And http://www.rbduncan.com/schrod.htm

There's a lot more too.

And this you can find out by buying my latest book Universities Asleep at the Switch at Amazon.com or by reading it FREE simply by clicking the following links:

http://www.amperefitz.com/unvasleep.htm (This link is faster if you have dial up.)

http://www.amperefitz.com/ua_20071020_ck_ds_jm_ds.pdf (This is the book FREE in Adobe.).

Over 4 Decades of Fitzpatrick's Books, Papers & Thoughts http://www.amperefitz.com/4.decades.htm

Web pages are at: http://www.amperefitz.com & http://www.rbduncan.com

Thanks for reading this. Let me know what YOU think. e-mail is Th1nker@indiainfo.com

This page can be copied and published by anyone as long as it is copied and published in its entirety.

Feb. 2, 2010

Daniel P. Fitzpatrick Jr.

 

 

Here's one on June 12th 2018 telling about a Britannica mistake, but half way through is a most interesting dissertation on how our eyes see COLORS.

Britannica in html:
http://rbduncan.com/britannica.html

Britannica in Word:http://rbduncan.com/britannica.doc

Britannica in Adobe pdf:http://rbduncan.com/britannica.pdf

 

See: Phase symmetry makes quantum theory more complete. 12-02-2013