I'm going to interrupt the usual presentation of the website material with a bit of a blog post. A few days ago I started a conversation with a chemical physicist on Quora who pointed out that one of my answers was wrong. The problem was, I had not explained first that I was using ultrawave theory to supply the answer. That was an oversight, but not of significance to the real issue. After a few back and forth responses, he just stopped communicating. I can only assume that he felt he was wasting his time trying to get me to accept that the ground state of hydrogen has zero angular momentum and also assumed I was a crank by one of his remarks; one he tried to take back later, but once the cat is out of the bag... In QM that is how ground states are defined, as L=0. That is just a definition without meaning, as the electron is not expected to sit still, but the motion has no meaning in QM. After I did some searching on how other PHD's explained it. There was no consensus on the physical meaning of it. UT by contrast is all about the physical. Every aspect to matter and energy has a physical explanation that is understandable from the perspective of what we know from our macroscopic world of interactions. There really is no reason to expect things in the subatomic quantum world to behave in a way that cannot be explained, except by learning weird ideas and obscure rules that have no corollary with everyday existence as current quantum theory requires. A realization came to me about why none of my papers are being accepted for publication, or why I run into this same kind of resistance to conversation. The realization is that current beliefs present circular logic argument problems, as the adherents to current theory can no longer see beyond it. They couch everything in its terms and are unable, or unwilling, to consider anything that doesn't fit into that near mystical paradigm of thought.
Being an outsider is what I believe has allowed me to discover the truth about how the universe operates, but also is what keeps me from breaking through the barrier keeping the rabble out. I know how many crazy or at least silly ideas people come up with that they want to tell someone in the fields of physics about, so I can understand why that barrier exists. The problem is that so many times I have seen advice to publish those ideas, as that is a current measure of worthiness. The thing is, if those papers are being reviewed by those who believe in current theory then anything that contradicts it is automatically rejected. Most times it is likely not intentionally done that way, but if one cannot see beyond what one currently believes then how can one be objective about something. UT for instance, ticks all of the boxes for a good theory. It is mathematically accurate, and highlights issues with current QM. It is simple, testable, predictive, and does not rely on any ideas that cannot be understood as being similar to everyday mechanics. The only difference is in how the 2D strings and branes are treated, as they are immutable in their existence, i.e. they have constant velocity and the strings have inherent and unchanging mass. No fields need exist that aren't made from the strings. No special ANYTHING is required to make it all fit together. Even gravity has a numerical and rational reason for being, and is merely a by-product of the creation of matter, which is why the two exist hand in hand. Anyone with an open mind who reads the book and sees how simple and reasonable it all is should immediately and instinctively know that it is at least partly correct. There are always alternative explanations for almost everything, so some of the details of my ideas my be off the mark, but overall it is consistent and those alternatives will need to accommodate the whole. That is why, I believe, that it is so hard to get mainstream physicists to consider UT, it does not fit in any way shape or form with what they have learned all their lives. I may have to resort to publishing the theory-independent findings that are significant advances without referring to UT. It is a sad referendum on the state of how physics is supposed to work.
Now, back to the normal material.
The new version of the book on Ultrawave Theory was completed and posted here in May of 2017. A .pdf file of the book and all of the downloads that go along with supporting it can be found by clicking on the appropriate tab to the left. Discrepancies between the book and any other information on the site may exist, but they should be minor. Any such anomalies should be deferred to what is contained in the book.
For those who have been here before and see how different things look. I have decided to pare down the website to present only the book and publishable papers that I write, along with any associated items. The first three finished papers that were originally listed below, but were temporarily removed, have now been replaced with the latest versions. They can be found using the appropriate tab to the left.
The following Excel™ file is something not contained in the book and therefore cannot have conflicting information. It gives you access to what no one else in the current Standard Model paradigm of physics has, the ability to determine constants without the need for measurements! I recently noticed that the last three values for C* at the bottom of the page were incorrect and fixed them. I also entered an electron mass on the right-hand side that gives the same values for e and h as the NIST 2017 special update. For those who do not have MS Excel, you will have to gain access to it to view the file, I apologize.
This is by no means the limit of the ability of this method to determine constants values. It can be applied to any constant that has components that are related by the ones used in the above file. This is true regardless of whose theory you believe. I will likely include some of this information in a later version, especially if I can expand it to other spin-1/2 particles and spin-1/2 atomic nuclei. Some of that will depend on the finding of the equation mentioned on the Publishable Paper page.
The formal papers may prove too difficult to decipher, so here are some Power Point presentations converted to Adobe PDF™ format that should be easier to follow. Reading the book is even better, and should make it easier to understand what ultrawaves are all about.