# Unified Field Theory

Posted by: Anonymous

## Unified Field Theory - 11/15/04 01:41 PM

If any one is interested in reading the Unified Field Theory of Rotational Energy Physics send me aa e-mail tomkar@highstream.net It is a fundamental particle theory that explains gravity and light under the same model.
I don't have a web site right now, so it would be a 1.7 Mb file as a pdf. About ten minutes to download on dial up.
Posted by: Uncle Al

## Re: Unified Field Theory - 11/16/04 12:44 AM

Idiot. EM and gravitation do not unify, even if you are wearing Kaluza-Klein jeans.

Class. Quantum Grav. 17 4125 (2000)
It is possible to obtain exactly the Maxwell equations from the Einstein field equation, but there is a long list of caveats that inevitably breaks the analogy with electromagnetism.

The source of monopole radiation is a changing monopole moment for a charge q or for a mass m. Since charge and mass are conserved, there can be neither monopole electromagnetic radiation nor monopole gravitational radiation.

The source of dipole radiation is a changing dipole moment. (Punctiliously, you need a second time derivative of the dipole moment.) For a pair of charges

d = qr + q'r'

and there's nothing special about the derivatives. For a pair of masses, the gravitational dipole moment is

d = mr + m'r'

and its time derivative is

mv + m'v' = p + p'

By conservation of momentum the second time derivative of the gravitational dipole moment is zero, and you can go to a center of momentum frame and set the first derivative to zero as well. There is no gravitational "electric dipole" radiation.

Consider the analog of "magnetic dipole" radiation. The gravitational equivalent of the magnetic dipole moment for a pair of charges is

M = mv x r + m'v' x r'
("x" is the cross product, "mv" is the "mass current")

But M is the total angular momentum, which is also conserved. There is no gravitational "magnetic dipole" radiation.

The next moment up is quadrupole, with no relevant conservation laws, so gravitational quadrupole radiation is permitted. You can use this argument to advocate that gravity must be a tensorial (spin-2) interaction. Electromagnetism is mediated by spin-1 photons.
Posted by: DA Morgan

## Re: Unified Field Theory - 11/16/04 06:15 PM

That said ... there MUST be a unification. That neither of you knows how to perform it is, of course, equally true.

To state that there is no unification is to state, in effect, that most of modern cosmology is wrong: Something that is less likely than that you are incorrect.
Posted by: superman

## Re: Unified Field Theory - 11/17/04 02:18 AM

Good to see I have not missed much since I have been concentrating on my duties at Cirque Du Soleil. It would seem Al has not changed a bit... Posted by: Anonymous

## Re: Unified Field Theory - 11/26/04 06:43 PM

There is an unification , but you think wrong. Heisenberg sais you can't have all in the same time knowldedge and precision. I see more far than you can without to use math . I use imagination.
With my imagination i descovered quantum theory before to hear about it . But when I start to write an article I realised my ideas were impossible from mathematical point of wiew. Searching a new type of space where my ideas can work I have found ... only into a matrix of data my ideas could work.
If my theory is good then we are only cartoons on a comuter display.
Nobody can't descover my theory becouse all search for mathematical solutions and my idea is a mathematical imposibility has no solutions into an euclidean space. Never a classic phisician will not unify fields becouse starts from a wrong vision about space.
All of this discussion about time and gravity is easily understood. The formulas are t=dKE=m=Ws not=to Pv and not-t=PE=M=Ws=Pv, where m=mass, M=Momentum, Ws=Wave shape or spectrum of matter waves, Pv=Particle velocity. Time is delta Kinetic Energy, can you think of a time event that is NOT a kinetic energy event? Thus "time" is how the wave-particle languages of complementarity are stitched together. Thus space time is 5 dimensional : xyzwp. Thus acceleration is Pv>Ws :inertia and deceleration and weight is Ws>Pv of over running MATTER WAVES. Gravity then is bose-bonding fermions in a gravity well CAPACITANCE similar to cooper pair electrons in superconductivity. So, Heisenberg got it wrong, delta momentum is an oxymoron. Delta means rate of CHANGE, Momentum means no CHANGE of state. Thus momentum is not a determinant in the formula h=dMxdPv or h=dMxdWs, it is a RESULT of W=P, the temporary but precise BALANCE of wave-particle. The correct formula then is h=W>P or W<P wherein a new h quantum area is being added in a mass change of state. Einstein's "rest mass" is the same kind of oxymoron. more details @ waynepowell25@hotmail.com 