Alpha Institute for Advanced Studies

Many thanks, this is excellent typesetting. There are only six minor typo’s left:

1) Eq. (2) W sub mu sup 1 – i W sub mu sup 2 in the top right of the matrix; W sub mu sup 1 + i W sub mu sup 2 in the bottom left of the matrix.
2) Eq. (4) partial sub mu in front of the first column vector.
3) Eq. (19) misplaced + sign.
4) Eq. (21), sup + on LHS.
5) Eq. (23), – sign .
6) Eq. (50) missing g = 0.

When these remaining typo’s are fixed this typeset version can replace the current UFT225 on www.aias.us can can be sent to CERN as originally intended. It refutes the GWS sector of the CERN claim about a “Higgs boson”. The U(1) sector has already been refuted in many ways. Ryder has failed to reply to these criticisms, which have been checked by computer algebra.

To: EMyrone@aol.com
Sent: 22/11/2012 11:06:29 GMT Standard Time
Subj: RE: UFT225

Here it is,

Regards

Victor

Subject: UFT225

hello Victor:

These are the corrections sent on 20th August for UFT225. The new typesetter should fix these typo’s. Thanks in anticipation.

UFT225.pdf

a232ndpapernotes1.pdf

Journal of Foundations of Physics and Chemistry (www.cisp-publishing.com)

About 80% of standard physics is very well known off the famous www.aias.us site to be either erroneous or obsolete, and no one is going to accept a Nobel Prize for the Higgs boson. They will be politically forced to accept it or be sacked, effectively, but in their minds will not accept it. In Dec. 1915 Schwarzschild showed that the original calculation of the precessing ellipse by Einstein (Nov. 1915) was wrong. By now, many others have also shown that it is wrong. So those “precision tests” may or may not produce useful data, but these data can never prove an obviously erroneous theory.

amarionandthorntonapsidalanglesandprecession.pdf

In a message dated 15/11/2012 04:18:48 GMT Standard Time writes:

Dear Myron,
I am writing this as the layman I am and as such having read through your book chapter several times, each time more and more awed by the enormity of the achievements made to date. It took this summary overview for me as a layman to really ‘get it’! Congratulations to all involved! I only wish I could pass this on to every other physics layman like myself on the planet. However, even better would be a version edited for this purpose (and perhaps with a little more about Stephen Crothers’ contributions), and in a language more suitable for such an audience. In any case, I assume that the original is under publisher embargo.

Kind regards,
Axel Westrenius

On 12/11/2012, at 9:41 PM, EMyrone wrote:

This is the first draft of the invited book chapter, reviewing UFT101 to UFT230. It is pencilled in as Evans, Eckardt and Lindstrom plus AIAS author group. Any comments or input from the group are welcome. We have almost a year in which to prepare it (to November 1st 2013). By that time it is probable that another twenty or thirty papers will have been produced if all goes well. Since this is based on an extension of UFT200 I request permission from Victor Riecansky to extend it for the invited book review, which marks the fact that ECE has been accepted worldwide as mainstream physics. The abstract submitted a few months ago has been accepted and rated very good to excellent in all respects. AIAS Fellows are welcome to add to this document in a discussion, outlining perhaps the general impact of ECE and the incredibly shaky basics of the standard model. For example Horst Eckardt, Douglas Lindstrom, Stephen Crothers, Gareth Evans, Robert Cheshire, Franklin Amador, Kerry Pendergast, Ray Delaforce and others.
<abookchapter.docx>

=

abookchapter-DL.doc

amarionandthorntonapsidalanglesandprecession.pdf

a231stpaper.pdf

a231stpapernotes1.pdf

a231stpapernotes2.pdf

a231stpapernotes3.pdf

a231stpapernotes4.pdf

a231stpapernotes5.pdf

a231stpapernotes6.pdf

a231stpapernotes7.pdf