Archive for October, 2012

Diary Statistics End of October 2012

Wednesday, October 31st, 2012

Feed: Dr. Myron Evans
Posted on: Wednesday, October 31, 2012 5:00 AM
Author: metric345
Subject: Diary Statistics End of October 2012

From 1st January 2010, when stats of this type became available, to Oct 31st 2012 there have been 126,260 readings of my diary on (the “blog”) from one hundred and forty three countries, led by Britain, U. S. and Canada. There are nearly fifteen thousand postings and archives go back to 2006. The entire diary is kindly interwoven with feedback and transferred to pdf by AIAS Fellow Michael Jackson and archived quarterly at the British Library in London from the National Library of Wales. In the last thirty days the interest has been dominated by low energy nuclear reactors (LENR), the most read postings are: Brillouin energy theory; interest in LENR, proposed LENR conference at Aberystwyth, UFT229(3), LENR accepted, wave driven LENR. UFT226 – UFT230 on LENR are now available on

View article…

List of Papers Published in Journal and Future Plans

Wednesday, October 31st, 2012

Feed: Dr. Myron Evans
Posted on: Wednesday, October 31, 2012 4:29 AM
Author: metric345
Subject: List of Papers Published in Journal and Future Plans

To Victor:

This is a list of papers published in the first six issues, and plans for the first 24 issues drafted up some time ago. We can post each finally published paper on . As mentioned, I think that Issues 7 and 8 should be UFT203 to 230, then the following issues can be based on these plans. There are about one hundred and eighty papers available for publication in the journal over the next few years, and a large number of invited reviews in preparation.



View article…

Daily Report 30/10/12

Wednesday, October 31st, 2012

Feed: Dr. Myron Evans
Posted on: Wednesday, October 31, 2012 12:07 AM
Author: metric345
Subject: Daily Report 30/10/12

There were 2480 hits from 651 distinct visits, each of n real visits, 32.7% spiders from baidu, yandex, google and MSN. CEFE65, CEFEL40, FPL28, LMEP15. General Sarmiento National University Argentina index; Concordia University Canada UFT4; National Technological University of Chile UFT222(Sp); University of Miami UFT4; University of California Los Angeles UFT175; Deaprtment of Aerospace Engineering and Engineering Mechanics University of Texas at Austin IJTP Crothers; Complutensian University Madrid Esay25(Sp); Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology Hyderabad India Space Energy; Italian National Computational Laboratory Univeristy of Salerno Italy LCR resonant; University of Salento Italy UFT103, 104; National Medical Holding Kazakhstan general; Mexican National Institute of Scientific and Technological Research (Potosino, coordinating several institutes) UFT177(Sp); National University of Mexico UFT174(Sp); Students University of Luton UFT205; Virtual Private Network of the Department of Statistics Oxford University UFT170; University College London UFT118. Intense interest all sectors, attached updated usage file for October, showing intense interest in all material on

View article…

Checking Note 231(1).

Wednesday, October 31st, 2012

Feed: Dr. Myron Evans
Posted on: Tuesday, October 30, 2012 12:29 AM
Author: metric345
Subject: Checking Note 231(1).

Many thanks for going through this note. The first point is answered by the associative law of matrix multiplication:

(AB)C = A(BC)

(G. Stephenson, “Mathematical Methods of Science Students”, (Longmans 1968), p. 287, eq. (18)). Will think about the second point and report back.

In a message dated 29/10/2012 19:05:05 GMT Standard Time, writes:

Eq.(16) seems to be problematic because mu in eq.(15) is a dummy index, q sup a sub mu can not be isolated by multiplying with another g sub mu,nu.
In eq.(43) R can only be defined in this way because the tensors Omega and q are linearly dependent. This works in the example of the circular complex basis, I am not sure if this works in cases where the vector spaces or bases significantly differ. Perhaps one has to start with the wave equation ( 46) directly in that case.


Am 29.10.2012 11:37, schrieb EMyrone

This note gives the foundations of a new type of differential geometry in which the tetrad is defined as a mixed index metric. The whole of Cartan’s differential geometry can be developed in terms of mixed index metric, and classical and quantum equations of ECE unified physics derived. These contain more information because they are equations of a higher topology. This is the first note in this series.

View article…

Daily Report 29/10/12

Wednesday, October 31st, 2012

Feed: Dr. Myron Evans
Posted on: Tuesday, October 30, 2012 12:11 AM
Author: metric345
Subject: Daily Report 29/10/12

There were 2811 hits from 696 distinct visits, 33.4% spiders from baidu, google, MSN and yandex. CEFE58, CEFEL 39, FPL27, LMEP15. Physics Federal University of Paraiba Brazil UFT42; University of Sao Paolo Brazil UFT142; University of Quebec Trois Rivieres UFT230; Astronomy Pontifical University of Chile UFT102, UFT109; Max Planck Institute for Mathematics in the Sciences Leipzig UFT88; Technical University Freiburg 2D paper; University of Regensburg UFT25; University of Poitiers general; Physics, University of Ioannina Greece UFT26; Energy Research Centre National University of Mexico F3(Sp); Oak Hammock Retirement Community at the University of Florida Gainesville UFT155; National University of Piura Peru UFT176(Sp); University of Transilvania Romania LCR resonant; University of Lancaster UFT41; British Ministry of Defence UFT177. Intense interest all sectors, attached updated usage file for October for use of e mail listing.

View article…

Daily Report 24/10/12

Thursday, October 25th, 2012

Feed: Dr. Myron Evans
Posted on: Wednesday, October 24, 2012 11:18 PM
Author: metric345
Subject: Daily Report 24/10/12

There were 3,373 hits from 730 distinct visits each of n real visits, 53.9% spiders from baidu, google, MSN, yandex, choopa, sistrix and utel. CEFE51, CEFEL33, FPL21, LMEP13. Pontifical University of Rio Grande do Sul Brazil UFT170(Sp); Institute of Chemistry of University of Sao Paolo UFT162; Dupont Corporation UFT140; Theoretical Physics University of Heidelberg UFT41; Department of Mathematics Arizona State University UFT88; Jacksonville State University Essay 6; North Dakota State University LCR resonant; New York Polytechnic MWE page; University of Virginia UFT175; University of Murcia Spain UFT139 (Sp); University of Rovira and Virgili Tarragona Spain UFT132(Sp); The Helsinki Institute of Physics UFT214-1b; University of Caen UFT214-1b; University of Poitiers general; Alaska Regional Headquarters U. S. National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) UFT papers; University of Sonora Mexico UFT164(Sp); Peruvian Navy UFT148(Sp); Meteorology Government of Serbia general; Ioffe Institute Russia staff, some essays; National Dong Hwa University Taiwan reply to t’ Hooft; Frantsevich Institute for Materials Science Kiev ECE (Russian), UFT26; University of Manchester Essay 26; Theoretical Physics University of Manchester UFT176; University of Central Lancaster UFT25; Stellenbosch University South Africa 2D paper. Intense interest all sectors, attached updated usage file.

View article…

Daily Report 18/10/12

Friday, October 19th, 2012

Feed: Dr. Myron Evans
Posted on: Friday, October 19, 2012 12:20 AM
Author: metric345
Subject: Daily Report 18/10/12

There were 2,690 hits from 631 distinct visits, each of n real visits, 48.7% spiders from baidu, google, MSN, and yandex. CEFE41, CEFEL20, FPL15, LMEP8. Department of Astronomy University of Montreal UFT10; Canadian Institute for Theoretical Astrophysics UFT199; Biobio University Chile F4(Sp); Energy Research Institute Technical University of Clausthal general, AIAS selected for website archives; Michigan State University UFT228; Ohio State University UFT13; University of California Los Angeles Proof2; University of Maryland levitron; Astronomy Program University of Texas at Austin UFT151, general; Nanoscience Centre Jyvaskyla University Finland UFT152; University of Poitiers general; Universite Pierre et Marie Curie Paris general; Lemans University UFT175(Sp); U. S. National Institute for Science and Technology (NIST) equation flowcharts; Ames Research Centre U. S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) general; Hong Kong University of Science and Technology UFT105; Department of Mathematics Tokyo Metropolitan University UFT88; U. S. Naval Observatory (NAVO) UFT42; Guanajuato University Mexico F5(Sp); University of Otago New Zealand UFT88; School of Engineering and Computer Science Victoria University Wellington New Zealand UFT114; National University of Sciences and Technology Pakistan UFT140; Magdalene College Cambridge UFT85. Intense interest all sectors, attached usage file updated daily.

Usage Statistics for

Summary Period: October 2012 – URL
Generated 08-Oct-2012 23:55 EDT

View article…

Plasmon Frequency and Drude Sommerfeld Model

Saturday, October 13th, 2012

Feed: Dr. Myron Evans
Posted on: Friday, October 12, 2012 8:48 AM
Author: metric345
Subject: Plasmon Frequency and Drude Sommerfeld Model

I will continue the development of UFT230 with a plasmon model on the ECE level. On the U(1) level the free electron model (Drude Sommerfeld) results in the quantized plasmon energy

E = h bar omega


omega = (N e squared / (m epsilon sub 0))


N = conduction electron density
e = charge on the electron
m = electron mass
epsilon sub 0 = free space permittivity
h bar = Planck’s constant

So in low energy nuclear fusion induced with a carbon arc, the plasmons are absorbed and the transmission coefficient of quantum tunnelling can be made to approach 100% when a sufficient number of plasmons are absorbed in an n plasmon absorption process. Under these conditions two atoms in a carbon arc plasma fuse, giving off energy that is repeatable and reproducible. The carbon arc induced plasma is an electron (i.e. fermion) gas obeying Fermi Dirac statistics.

View article…

UFT230: LENR, Important Results from Doug Lindstrom

Saturday, October 13th, 2012

Feed: Dr. Myron Evans
Posted on: Friday, October 12, 2012 4:55 AM
Author: metric345
Subject: UFT230: LENR, Important Results from Doug Lindstrom

In my opinion these are important results from co author Doug Lindstrom that show that quantum absorption of photons, phonons and plasmons play a key role in low energy nuclear reactions, increasing the transmission coefficient of quantum tunnelling up to 43% for n = 10. This theory can be greatly refined, but its essence is clear already. I will go on to develop the theory in further notes for UFT230.

In a message dated 12/10/2012 11:47:50 GMT Daylight Time, writes:


Here is the calculation for T assuming a phonon wavelength of 10^-10m.

If E= n hbar omega, then

n T
1 .071
3 .22
5 .32
10 .43

n could represent a higher energy state in the oxygen nucleus or a wavelength multiplier for the phonon (a phonon wavelength of 10^-9 m makes the transmission coefficient respectable.)

On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 3:26 AM, <EMyrone> wrote:

OK agreed, will continue with notes for this paper today, looking at plasmons and phonons in terms of the ECE wave equation.

In a message dated 12/10/2012 07:56:54 GMT Daylight Time, writes:

Thanks, Doug, I see that we have a definition problem of the upper integration limit here. I suggest to set

E = hbar omega

and include it in the calculation as before. Then the upper limit should be unique for T(omega).

What is beta? I did not find a definition in the code (probably I looked not thorough enough


Verschickt: Fr, 12 Okt 2012 1:05 am
Betreff: Re: calculation of transmission coefficients for phonon energies

Here is a first go at 230(2).. There are four plots, the first shows the lower integration limit just under 1.2. The other three are for an upper integration limit of
eta = 10, 100, and 1000. The transmission coefficient is going to zero, the larger the upper integration limit. If I have made no errors, it seems that we need to have an E not equal to zero term in equation (16) if we want non-zero coefficients. I will check my calculations tomorrow, I a too tired now to find an error.

On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 8:15 AM, Doug Lindstrom

I will give it a try today.

On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 5:27 AM, Horst Eckardt <horsteck> wrote:


could you do a calculation of the transmission coefficient for the oxygen-carbon system with replacing mu by formula (18) of note 230(2) ?
V is the sum of Woods Saxon and Coulomb potential as before, theta is to be evaluated with E=0.
omega0 in (18) is to be replaced by omega0 + omega according to eq.(20). This gives a graph T(omega), starting with omega=0.


View article…

Reply from Professor Martin Rees

Saturday, October 13th, 2012

Feed: Dr. Myron Evans
Posted on: Friday, October 12, 2012 4:29 AM
Author: metric345
Subject: Reply from Professor Martin Rees

Agreed, standard physics is intellectually and morally bankrupt. It has nothing left to say.

Civil List Scientist.

In a message dated 12/10/2012 08:36:17 GMT Daylight Time, writes:

Dear Mr. White and Mr. Westrenius,

Thank you so much for sending me the link to the announcement of
Professor Martin Rees’ public lecture at the University of Sydney in
November, prompting me to write to him:

As you see below I received a prompt reply from him. But it is my
opinion that his short missive is a masterly executed piece of
Machiavellian sycophancy by which scientific truth has again been
buried alive.

Of course, we had no real expectation of anything otherwise, and so it
might seem that our recent correspondence with him, and Professor
Maudlin, seem, prima facie, as exercises in futility. Generally
speaking we already know from collective experience that communicating
scientific truths to professional scientists is indeed a waste of time
and effort, and so we do not usually bother. But sometimes we must and
in these recent two cases I feel that we have not really wasted out
time, because in doing so we have had to think hard, as true
scientists must, in order to convey the facts in the most simple terms
possible so that our scientific and other colleagues all around the
world can see for themselves the travesty of science that is being
perpetrated by the international community of professional scientists.
So this has produced great progress in our scientific work because we
have now been able to distil our irrefutable scientific facts into
very simple terms by means of reducing all the obfuscating
mathematical mumbo-jumbo that the professional scientists use to
conceal the true meaning of Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity,
into a few simple physical principles and a few relatively simple
mathematical calculations that can be expounded in a few pages. Let us
review our latest accomplishments from these encounters.

First, we have demonstrated that the concept of the black hole is
inconsistent with General Relativity on account of the simple fact
that Einstein’s requirement that his Principle of Equivalence and his
Special Relativity must manifest in sufficiently small finite regions
of his gravitational field cannot be satisfied by a spacetime that by
mathematical construction contains no matter. Since Ric = 0 is a
spacetime that by mathematical construction contains no matter it is
therefore meaningless. Since the black hole was spawned from Hilbert’s
solution to Ric = 0 it too is consequently meaningless. Since the
black hole is a theoretical entity alleged to be derived from
Hilbert’s metric it too is meaningless. Since the theoretical
Michell-Laplace Dark Body of Newton’s theory of gravitation is
certainly not a black hole either, then it follows that there is no
theory that predicts the black hole at all. Not surprisingly nobody
has therefore ever found a black hole, despite the almost daily false
claims of their discovery all over the place, and so there is no
physical evidence of such a bizarre entity. Ergo, the relativistic
black hole does not exist except as a figment of an unscientific
imagination. And we have achieved this without making any calculations
at all, in a single page of writing that even a high school student
can follow.

Second, we have demonstrated that Einstein’s pseudo-tensor is a
meaningless concoction of mathematical symbols and hence that his
formulation of the usual conservation of energy and momentum is false,
and that the consequence of this is that his field equations violate
the usual conservation of energy and momentum, placing them in direct
conflict with experiment on a very deep level, thereby making General
Relativity invalid. We have done this with a few none too difficult
calculations, and some considerations on the conservation of energy
and momentum. The result is irrefutable. Thus, we have also proven
that the Big Bang cosmology is a fantasy, with its associated creatio
ex nihilo and expansion of the Universe; that Einstein’s gravitational
waves do not exist; and that “Einstein’s twisted nothingness” is

With this concise exposition that we now have I will arrange for
journal publication of the material and subsequent posting to
electronic archives for easy and free internet access to all and

We can also see clearly that many professional scientists are
frequently given to allowing their beliefs to predetermine the outcome
of their scientific inquiries (e.g. black holes, Big Bang,
gravitational waves) contrary to the scientific method, no less so
than Galileo’s adversaries who flatly refused to look through his
telescope to see the truth for themselves, and so society cannot
afford to allow professional scientists to dictate what is and what is
not. It is also a fact that vast sums of public money have been
squandered by professional scientists on meaningless ‘scientific
projects’ that have, ipso facto, brought nothing in return to the
benefit of society. I am reminded of Heaviside’s penetrating quip:

“It was once told as a good joke upon a mathematician that the poor
man went mad and mistook his symbols for realities; as M for the moon
and S for the sun.”
(Heaviside, O. Electromagnetic Theory, Vol. 1, p.133, 1893)

And so we will continue with our work and continue to challenge the
false dogmas that have now plunged astrophysical science and physics
generally into a state of intellectual decrepitude. After all,
professional scientists have no monopoly on scientific knowledge and
can be outclassed by non-professional scientists.

Kind regards,
Steve Crothers

Many thanks for being in touch over this, You certainly have several people
more expert in releativity than I am in Australia, and as you can guess I
maynot have time to properly immerse myself in this controversy With best
regards Martin Rees

View article…