This sounds very interesting, several scholars now have a good grasp of ECE theory.
To: EMyrone@aol.com
Sent: 31/01/2014 17:49:07 GMT Standard Time
Subj: Re: Masurement of B(3)Hi Myron
Currently I am trying to get the extended TBS (Tight Bound State) experiment done at NIST in Washington which has all the needed equipment. It predicts 3 new spectrtal lines in hydrogen. I believe ECE theory may help facilitate the experiment
Best
RichardI have a few remarks as follows. The B(3) field is easily measurable in material matter in a number of ways as reviewed for example in UFT200 and UFT100. It was inferred originally from the inverse Faraday effect, so was based on data from inception. This is why Vigier accepted it immediately in late 1992. The Heisenberg indeterminacy is rejected entirely by the AIAS group because it has been refuted experimentally many times by the Croca group, by up to nine orders fo magnitude, and because it has been refuted theoretically in UFT175. See Croca’s book “Towards a Nonlinear Quantum Physics” in my series “Contemporary Chemical Physics”. It was replaced in UFT13. The B(3) field is phaseless and propagates in the vacuum. I think that your experiments refer to the vacuum B(3) field. It is well known that radiative corrections indicate the presence of oscillating potentials in the vacuum, but even the radiative corrections must be measured by interaction with matter. Notwithstanding our rejection of indeterminacy, your series of experiments looks very interesting. Have any of them been carried out? More generally ECE theory manifests itself in many ways not given by standard physics, so do all theories of electrodynamics which use higher topology. I would argue that a massless photon is a mathematical absurdity of no significance to physics. As you know, the Paris School refer to the photon as propagating at c for all practical purposes. The inverse Faraday effect was first observed by van der Ziel et al at Harvard in the mid sixties, and since then has been observed many times. It is a longitudinal magnetization induced by a circularly polarized electromagnetic field. In the pre B(3) era it was interpreted through the conjugate product A(1) x A(2) of vacuum potentials, where A(1) x A(2) = A x A*. It is a very small effect mediated by a hyperpolarizability. In volume 1 of the first edition of Evans and Kielich, “Modern Nonlinear Optics”, Advances in Chemical Physics volume 85(1), (1992, reprinted 1993 and 1997), there is a review of the inverse Faraday effect by Zawody, with about 150 references. The obsolete standard physics asserted that A(1) and A(2) existed in the vacuum, but not A(0) or A(3). This absurdity has been refuted many times over in my Omnia Opera since 1992. There is a section on www.aias.us called “Omnia Opera”, which can be accessed by clicking “Myron Evans”. It contains all the source material.
I hope this prose rendition is conceptually understandable. Regarding the difficulty of empirically measuring the B(3) field. I suggest it is masked by the Copenhagen uncertainty principle. Do you think this is a valid argument: If the photon was massless c would be infinite?
I have developed a ‘continuous-state’ cosmology. Beginning with work I did with Vigier on integrating gravity & electomagnetism (The paper is in the 2000 Berkeley Vigier III conference proceedings). Vigier chose to ‘fix’ one of the coordinate systems and then use the Dirac polarized vacuum to perform the G-EM integration. Some years later utiizing an idea by Kafatos where R-dot = c (the rate of change of scale in the universe) applied not to a Big Bang expansion but instead internalized to a ‘continuous-state’ process, I then alternated the fixing of the G-EM coordinates. One salient interpretaion was that photon mass was not uniform, but periodic – occuring only during a moment of vacuum coupling (with the standard idea of internal motion). Thus photon mass oscillates from zero to a mass moment (This paper is in the 2nd Vigier proceedings). To my way of thinking one could derive a ‘beat frequency of spacetime based on this oscillation.
For our purposes the B(3) field would be zero at moment of zero photon mass and difficult to measure empirically without this understanding.
In the 8th Vigier proceedings I have designed several experiments to measure/mediate the B(3) field by utilizing a polarized Dirac vacuum resonance hierarchy that surmounts the uncertainty problem. In this model wave-particle duality is elevated to a principle of cosmology. Without this concatenation of postulates the experiment would putatively not work. It is a 12D model utilizing extensions of Cramer’s Transactional Interpretation and the de-Broglie-Bohm-Vigier Causal Interpretation. It (the Continuous-state) also relies heavily on Calabi-Yau mirror symmetry.
Now regarding reduction to absurdity. M-Theorists seek one unique 4D compactification. Regarding myron’s comment (in terms of contact geometry) in the 12D continuous-state (C-S)process there is a ‘spin-exchange C-S dimensional reduction process’ alternating even to odd D. 12D to 0D and back with inherent flips of Riemann sphere topology. M-Theory is now cast in 11D the 12thD here is like a super quantum potential or pilot wave synonymous with the Unified Field.
As the tools of quantum mechanics were invisible to classical mechanics so have the tools of unified field mechanics been invisible quantum mechanics. This addition to Evans model promises empirical access to the 3rd regime of reality