The posts saying my Ether Model can't be tested have ignored my posts where I mention a possible field test that predicts effects of an ether (not directly demonstrating the ether, but, certain effects having been predicted, would be strong indirect evidence of its existence.
How could we have ever missed that, what with all your hand-waving and word salad constantly obstructing our view? Maybe if you were to write it down clearly and concisely then you might be able to convince somebody.
As I've said, such a test would be expensive, and no sponsor has been found to get it done.
So apply for a grant. What would ever make you think that we would be sources of such funding?
One of the key skills for research scientists is how to write a request for a grant. You obviously lack that skill, so I would recommend that you ally yourself with a research scientist, mostly likely a physicist, who can help you through that process. Of course, you would first have to convince him/her of any promise your ideas have, so yet again you would have to be able to present your ideas clearly and concisely. And show the math! (or at least the basis for the math)
Every path that you must take involves the same basic requirement: a clear and concise and cogent description of your ideas, preferably including some of the required math. Since we have seen no hints of any such description, we can safely assume that it does not exist. Create it! Until you do that, you have nothing.
Failing at that, I'm sure you could find a way to tap into some of that massive dark money swirling around in the Q-niverse. Maybe if you could pitch your experiment as being able to prove that Trump is indeed Jesus Christ.
During the Viet Nam period, I was an MD in the Army.
Did the Army recruit (or draft) you out of medical school, possibly early, and then train you for combat medicine? I don't know whether the US Army did that, though the military's demand for medical skills has always been high such that in the 80's MDs in their 60's and older were getting direct commissions. A similar thing happened to Frederick Banting with the Canadian Army in WWI when they fast-tracked medical students to get them in the field treating the wounded. After the war, Banting continued to practice as a surgeon until he turned his attention to the treatment of glycosuria and earned a Nobel Prize (the youngest laureate ever for Physiology/Medicine at 32) for treating diabetes with insulin.
I'm also reminded of that scene in M*A*S*H where Houlihan asks out loud how such a degenerate could have ever reached a position of responsibility in the US Army Medical Corps, to which the chaplain, "Dago Red", responds, "He was drafted."
Edited by dwise1, : Added "constantly obstructing our view" to my first sentence
For anybody curious the actual origin of quantum theory is the emission spectrum of helium, i.e. the frequencies of light helium emits. People had tried to handle this problem by adding stochasticity (non-determinism) and discreteness into the Bohr-like Solar System models of the atom to no avail.
Heisenberg went to Helgoland in 1925 and took as his basis two empirical facts: the emission spectra of hydrogen first predicted by Bohr and the emission rates worked out by Einstein. Emission rates roughly being how rapidly hydrogen will give off a frequency of light when supplied with the energy to do so. His idea was that if he could find a framework where he could derive the emission rates from the spectrum then this framework would also be able to handle helium. He also imposed the requirement that the equations relating spectra and emission rates from classical electromagnetism continued to be true in the atomic regime.
So he had three ingrediants: 1. Bohr's Emission spectra 2. Einstein's Emission rates 3. The classical equations relating spectra and rates
He found the only way to feed 1 into 3 was by dropping the idea that electrons had positions or momenta, once he did that he could instantly compute 2 using 1 and 3.
Shortly after with Born and Jordan he expanded his new framework out from just spectra to an entirely new rewrite of mechanics.
Schrodinger came up with what initially seemed like a new theory, but was later shown by Born and Dirac to actually be identical to Heisenberg's formalism, just written in a different notation.
Bohr then tighten the framework by showing that the central point from which everything flowed was dropping the notion of observation independent properties, a central concept of everyday human thought. Physics was now a symbolism of atomic scale measurements, not a direct description of the atomic world.
Pauli and others then showed that Helium could be correctly handled by this new theory and thus by 1931 the new quantum mechanics was fully formulated.
I don't want to get deeply into lattice theory, inasmuch as, from the perspective of my ether model, it's just another aspect of consensus quantum theory, and my Ether Model has a fundamentally divergent perspective on theoretic permutations of quantum physics.
However, when I looked up "lattice, atom" on the Internet, and checked all the sub-references to it in Wikipedia, I found a number of sources dealing with it, including in Wikipedia. You have to stick with its sub-references to find them.
Oh, Son Goku, I don't think he's referring to anything in this universe. He apparently comes from a different reality.
Well, don't forget we're talking about a guy who thinks aliens gave him to a key to a code somewhere and that inspired his ether fantasy. I have to wonder why the aliens want HIM to know about the code and ether? What's in it for them? Why didn't they give the code to Stephen Hawking or someone who could actually understand it?
What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python
One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie
If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy
The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq