My latest "book" (if such it is) can be accessed here. Below I list the chapter headings
Introduction
1. Wave function collapse and
non-locality
2. The Macroscopic vs. Microscopic
Question
3. Diffusion field theory of gravity
4. Developing an equation for the
gravitational constant
5. Interpretation of the equation
for the gravitational constant
6. The macroscopic boundary
question; initial thoughts
7. The F constant
8. Maintaining the gravitational
field energy with quantum collapse
9. Equilibrium gravitational field flux.
10 Towards a theory of consciousness
Some words taken from the Introductions:
.....And my usual disclaimer:
Before
I go any further I’d better add my usual disclaimer. This gravity project of mine reminds me of the
sort of speculative exercise involved when theories about the colour of dinosaurs
are offered. These colours leave little or no evidence in the rocks and so all
that can be done in this circumstance, given a dinosaur’s likely life style, is
to render the dinosaur in a colour scheme that is at best plausible, but not to
be taken too seriously. That’s how I see
me own theory of gravity; I personally I’m not party to either sufficient data
or understandings to either confirm or reject my speculations about gravity. At
best the picture I’ve painted seems a plausible enough to me and that, I
suppose, is the best I can expect. But right or wrong it has nevertheless been
an interesting avenue to explore, if only to show that it is probably an avenue
with a dead end.....
.....The way I’ve come to terms with the likelihood that my own theoretical renditions of reality are fanciful imaginings is to regard my creation as some other invented reality that, with a nod of respect to the glory of the true reality, makes a feeble attempt to emulate it, but when emulation fails I have to go it alone. I’ll therefore have to be satisfied in producing a reasonable looking & plausible presentation of some unlikely ideas. But you never know it might, perchance, be right for our world. As DNA pioneer Maurice Wilkins said encouragingly when it was clear that Watson and Crick’s first shot at a model of DNA failed badly against the data:
"One might say but why
not? It's an exploration to make a model. You make a model and if you make a
bit of a fool of yourself in the process why worry? ....you might get lucky!"
…in my case I need to get very lucky. Until then I look on this work as a work of science fiction.
No comments:
Post a Comment