Comments on: Generally Covariant Unified Field Theory - Myron W. Evans http://opensys.blogsome.com/2005/07/01/generally-covariant-unified-field-theory-myron-w-evans/ Philosophy, Physics and Metaphysics of Open Systems Sun, 03 Aug 2008 23:30:13 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.1-alpha by: Alexander Putney http://opensys.blogsome.com/2005/07/01/generally-covariant-unified-field-theory-myron-w-evans/#comment-66 Thu, 10 Aug 2006 04:29:33 +0100 http://opensys.blogsome.com/2005/07/01/generally-covariant-unified-field-theory-myron-w-evans/#comment-66 Well, more than a year later, I am back to follow-up with my URL which is growing still and will have a spanish mirror site shortly: www.humanresonance.org The pure math breakthrough here is found in the synchronicity of prime numbers in the Fibonacci sequence and how this has been applied in the geopositions of the pyramids of the world (www.humanresonance.org/phi.html). I welcome all comments on my site, and will get the contact email provided there into operation shortly... Alexander Putney Well, more than a year later, I am back to follow-up with my URL which is growing still and will have a spanish mirror site shortly:

www.humanresonance.org

The pure math breakthrough here is found in the synchronicity of prime numbers in the Fibonacci sequence and how this has been applied in the geopositions of the pyramids of the world (www.humanresonance.org/phi.html).

I welcome all comments on my site, and will get the contact email provided there into operation shortly…

Alexander Putney

]]> by: Doc http://opensys.blogsome.com/2005/07/01/generally-covariant-unified-field-theory-myron-w-evans/#comment-50 Sat, 31 Dec 2005 04:55:37 +0000 http://opensys.blogsome.com/2005/07/01/generally-covariant-unified-field-theory-myron-w-evans/#comment-50 What is Alexander Putney's web address? He said his web was going up soon, but I was unable to find it, more than five months later. Thanks. Doc What is Alexander Putney’s web address? He said his web was going up soon, but I was unable to find it, more than five months later.

Thanks.

Doc

]]> by: Alexander Putney http://opensys.blogsome.com/2005/07/01/generally-covariant-unified-field-theory-myron-w-evans/#comment-27 Fri, 22 Jul 2005 00:11:48 +0100 http://opensys.blogsome.com/2005/07/01/generally-covariant-unified-field-theory-myron-w-evans/#comment-27 It very much seems as though the AIAS is producing false theories to distract the physics community pursuing the Unified Field Theory. It is however interesting that the "Basic Geometrical Concepts" are indeed nonsensical, immediately putting off anyone with a solid understanding of physics. As noted, the 'idiot savant' may indeed provide the breakthrough key to the Unified Field Theory by using unconventional avenues to the truth. If Evans' Generally Covariant Unified Field Theory is easily identified as a nonsensical offering by physicists, perhaps the target audience to be disinformed by the books are the independent thinkers who are not pursuing the UFT through conventional (institutional) means. I happen to be one of these independent thinkers seeking the UFT, and I have completed a geometric model of spherical resonance based on the sacred mandalas of Sanskrit, Mayan and Tibetan cultures. For anyone interested in the possibility that the ancient understanding of sacred sound can inform the search for the unified field, my website will be up shortly. I would also like to provide my independent research papers in PDF to Chronostalker for review, as the question of human history, pyramid technologies and consciousness are inextricably intertwined with the quantum functions of 'junk' DNA. Alexander Putney It very much seems as though the AIAS is producing false theories to distract the physics community pursuing the Unified Field Theory. It is however interesting that the “Basic Geometrical Concepts” are indeed nonsensical, immediately putting off anyone with a solid understanding of physics. As noted, the ‘idiot savant’ may indeed provide the breakthrough key to the Unified Field Theory by using unconventional avenues to the truth. If Evans’ Generally Covariant Unified Field Theory is easily identified as a nonsensical offering by physicists, perhaps the target audience to be disinformed by the books are the independent thinkers who are not pursuing the UFT through conventional (institutional) means.

I happen to be one of these independent thinkers seeking the UFT, and I have completed a geometric model of spherical resonance based on the sacred mandalas of Sanskrit, Mayan and Tibetan cultures. For anyone interested in the possibility that the ancient understanding of sacred sound can inform the search for the unified field, my website will be up shortly. I would also like to provide my independent research papers in PDF to Chronostalker for review, as the question of human history, pyramid technologies and consciousness are inextricably intertwined with the quantum functions of ‘junk’ DNA.

Alexander Putney

]]> by: G.W. Bruhn http://opensys.blogsome.com/2005/07/01/generally-covariant-unified-field-theory-myron-w-evans/#comment-26 Sat, 09 Jul 2005 08:16:59 +0100 http://opensys.blogsome.com/2005/07/01/generally-covariant-unified-field-theory-myron-w-evans/#comment-26 With his comments above Mr. Felker tries to defend his master Myron W. Evans. We should apply the old latin saying here "Ut desint vires tamen est laudanda voluntas". see http://www.mathematik.tu-darmstadt.de/~bruhn/Felker-Article.html Better Myron W. Evans himself would make a statement. Gerhard W. Bruhn With his comments above Mr. Felker tries to defend his master Myron W. Evans.
We should apply the old latin saying here
“Ut desint vires tamen est laudanda voluntas”.
see
http://www.mathematik.tu-darmstadt.de/~bruhn/Felker-Article.html
Better Myron W. Evans himself would make a statement.
Gerhard W. Bruhn

]]> by: Lar Volker http://opensys.blogsome.com/2005/07/01/generally-covariant-unified-field-theory-myron-w-evans/#comment-25 Mon, 04 Jul 2005 14:53:04 +0100 http://opensys.blogsome.com/2005/07/01/generally-covariant-unified-field-theory-myron-w-evans/#comment-25 The critical analysis of Evans is overall incorrect except for typo's. Can you remove? [Moderator: What for?] Who wrote it? [Moderator: an expert referee wrote it.] 1) i, j, k are the cartesian unit vectors, r is defined in the standard way as in any textbook. [Moderator: r is not a straight line and not a curve - contrary to what Evans wrote.] 2) The unit vectors and metric vectors are defined as in "Vector Analysis Problem Solver". [Moderator: perhaps, except that, as the report shows in details, Evans does not understand what a vector is.] 3) Line element as in the same book. It can be defined several ways correctly. [Moderator: perhaps, execept that as the report shows in details, Evans does not use these terms with understanding.] 4) The complex circular basis is well known (e.g. Silver, "Irreducible Tensorial Sets" 1976). Complex circular basis is e(1) x e(2) = i e(3)* et cyclicum. [Moderator: perhaps, except that there nothing "circular" there, and except that in the text one formula contradicts another formula.] 6) (1.13) .This is easy to check and is correct. 7) Metric vector is the vector valued one-form, the tetrad. (see Carroll). [Moderator: if so it should be defined as such. A one-form on which manifold, with values in which vector bundle?] 8) Antisymmetric metric is the wedge product of tetrads. Read rest of book. [Moderator: there is no point of reading the rest of the book, when already the first chapter is plagued with elementary errors, when the author does not even know what a straight line is or what a tensor is. If there is any particular sentence in the Report that you do not agree with - please quote it and then provide your argument why you think it is not correct. I am sure that the author of the Report will be happy to discuss the issues.] The critical analysis of Evans is overall incorrect except for typo’s. Can you remove?
[Moderator: What for?]
Who wrote it?
[Moderator: an expert referee wrote it.]
1) i, j, k are the cartesian unit vectors, r is defined in the standard way as in any textbook.
[Moderator: r is not a straight line and not a curve - contrary to what Evans wrote.]
2) The unit vectors and metric vectors are defined as in “Vector Analysis Problem Solver”.
[Moderator: perhaps, except that, as the report shows in details, Evans does not understand what a vector is.]
3) Line element as in the same book. It can be defined several ways correctly.
[Moderator: perhaps, execept that as the report shows in details, Evans does not use these terms with understanding.]
4) The complex circular basis is well known (e.g. Silver, “Irreducible Tensorial Sets” 1976). Complex circular basis is e(1) x e(2) = i e(3)* et cyclicum.
[Moderator: perhaps, except that there nothing “circular” there, and except that in the text one formula contradicts another formula.]
6) (1.13) .This is easy to check and is correct.
7) Metric vector is the vector valued one-form, the tetrad. (see Carroll).
[Moderator: if so it should be defined as such. A one-form on which manifold, with values in which vector bundle?]
8) Antisymmetric metric is the wedge product of tetrads. Read rest of book.
[Moderator: there is no point of reading the rest of the book, when already the first chapter is plagued with elementary errors, when the author does not even know what a straight line is or what a tensor is. If there is any particular sentence in the Report that you do not agree with - please quote it and then provide your argument why you think it is not correct. I am sure that the author of the Report will be happy to discuss the issues.]

]]>