Theoretical science is progressing. But you never hear about in the news. No science evangelist has ever spoke of it and no one who who is truly advancing physics or cosmology today has won a Nobel prize.
There are thousands of scientists who have been working for the last 100 years pushing past the obstacles of today’s mainstream science taught in universities and going to those places that we know science can take us.
Having witnessed this advance up close and personal, I’m here to tell you what I found.
25 Years With the Best Minds You Never Heard Of
This is the first time I’ve reflected publicly about my the time I’ve spent with some of the brightest minds on the planet. When I think back on these great men and women, only now, almost three decades later, I feel the weight of the journey and the amazing moments I have witnessed.
I am the Forest Gump of natural philosophy, having witnessed historic conversations, discourse, and fights from some of the most brilliant and daring scientists of our generation. From PHDs from MIT taking on relativity, to geologists with infinite vision, to incredible experiments in backyard pools in Romania, I have seen the human spirit and intellect take science further than anyone could imagine.
No, these people are not crazy. They are brilliant and they risk everything including their reputation and livelihoods in persuit of scientific truth – something they all know was abandoned wholesale during the last 100 years in Big Physics and Big Cosmology.
In the early 1990s, a doctor of history and science formed a new alliance of scientists who were willing to take on Einstein’s special theory of relativity. Before the days of the ubiquitous internet, the found each other through online bulliten boards, books, and word of mouth mostly using the telephone. They setup meetings and wrote newsletters typed on typewriters sending copies through the mail. They set up debates between mainstream scientists defending Einstein and wrote serious scientific papers criticizing relativity and other established mainstream theories like the Big Bang.
The organizer was Dr. John Chappell and the organization was the Natural Philosophy Alliance. Having met an Argentinian physicist in 1992 who showed Einstein wrong in the 1940s, I found the group via the Internet in 1996 and headed for their 3rd annual conference in Flagstaff Arizona to present Dr. Carezani’s work at the conference. I was met at the airport by Neil Munch, a admittedly hyper engineer who was kind enough to give me a ride to my hotel.
After settling down in my room, I headed for the university and entered a large lecture hall with about 25 people who were intently listening to a lady talking in front of the group. She had an accent I could not recognize and was talking about something I was not understanding. Once in a while she would pick up some morcel of food and stick it in here garment. Between the bizzare accent and manner of speaking, to the bizarre hoarding of food in her garments, I spent my first ten minutes trying to convince myself that this was not a grand mistake, and the next 20 minutes listening a very fascinating lecture.
At the end of her speech where she was greeted with thunderous applause and she produced a small and shivering chihuahua from inside her garments which she gave one more treat. “Thank you Doctor Eberly Spencer”, said the moderator who turned out to Dr. John Chappell.
It was there where the door opened up to a parallel world of science where everything was questioned and I saw for the first time, progress being made in physics and cosmology.
Here are some of the most poignant advances by topic I have found over almost three decades of hanging out with those pushing science forward.
Relativity has probably produced the he most advancements outside of mainstream than any other theory with the exception of the Big Bang. But it is opposite from what you think. Both special and general relativity have been almost universally rejected by critical thinkers for the past 100 plus years.
Special relativity has been under attack almost since its inception in 1905 with Einstein’s contemporary and astronomer Herbert Dingle arguing against the theory most all of his professional career. This criticism has picked up considerably during the last few decades with the number critical thinkers joining the chorus of “throw it out”. Even dissident groups like the Electric Universe have joined the band wagon regularly pointing out the flaw in special relativity.
One of the best advancements from an “errant” special relativity was Dr. Ricardo Carezani’s autodynamic equations which eliminate the “magical” mass increase (as well as two other affects) predicted by Einstein. Carezani’s resulting simplified equations eliminate the bad-boy particle called the “neutrino” from radioactivity and in nuclear-nuclear collisions as well as allowing the ability to generate Bohr’s atom without wave equations.
General relativity has also been under attack. This is most evident when talking about general relativity’s infamous “space-time”. The term itself is purely mathematical and it because of the lack of any physicality, critical thinkers have concentrated on coming up with alternative models for gravity and light instead of the mystical “space-time”.
One of the best arguments that show that gravity in fact does not bend light comes from retired NASA scientist Dr. Edward Dowdye. A laser optical physicist, he observed that light was being bent not by space-time, but by the corona of the sun while outside the corona, there is no bending. Dowdye made other calculations that showed that the stars ripping around the center of our milky way galaxy were acting not using Einstein’s relativity, but simple Newtonian physics.
The Big Bang
Another theory that is almost universally panned by critical thinkers is the Big Bang. The paradoxes that come from the idea that the entire universe started out as a very small or infinity small dot does not fit well within the science woke community. Worse, is the idea that space and time itself expanded with the explosion. Even mainstream physics is searching for a solution to the big bang.
The name of the big bang game is “red shift”. The idea that everything in the universe is “red-shifted” because all the objects are moving away from each other. It is also curious that our earth seems to be sitting very close to where everything exploded. Science woke folks know that there could be other explanations for “red shift”.
In a recent paper from CNPS 2018 by Ray Gallucci shows that the distribution of galaxies in fact show a more even distribution and little evidence for and explosion. It turns out that most critical thinkers today agree the universe is eternal and there was no big bang and that red-shift is observed anywhere in the universe and therefore the logic of a big bang can be thrown out.
Dark matter was postulated because the stars at the edge of our galaxy were observed to be moving faster than regular Newtonian gravity predicted. Instead of looking at how we apply our gravity equations to this problem, scientists quickly invented an invisible force or “mass” to account for the faster. After all, one of the “sports” Big Physics plays is the new “something-a-thon” where new particles or forces in the universe are rewarded with Nobel Prizes and such. Dark matter is a big golden apple that Big Physics invented and they have yet to pick it.
For those not bound by their salaries and reputations, critical thinkers have either tried to explain the dark matter with something real like aether or show that it is not needed at all.
In the book, “Universal Cycle Theory: Neomechanics of the Hierarchically Infinite Universe,” Steve Puetz speculates that dark matter is ordinary matter that is non-luminous surrounding spinning galaxies and galactic clusters. Their models include aether which is the substance through which light waves travel.
Cameron Rebigsol and Bob de Hilster say dark matter is not needed. Instead of treating the gravitational field of a galaxy as if it were uniform, both Rebigsol and de Hilster apply Newton’s gravity to the non-uniform gravitational field and show that the speed of stars at the edge of the galaxy can be explained by Newton and there is no need for dark matter.
The talk about parallel universes and four or more dimensions doesn’t sit right with a person who considers themselves a critical thinker in science. Parallel and multi-dimensions to most who love science fall into the pseudoscience camp. But in today’s Big Physics and Big Cosmology, this is common place.
With so any critical thinkers out there, someone was bound to come along and give us a new direction when it comes to the levels of the universe. That person is Dr. Glenn Borchardt. A geologist by trade, but a natural philosopher by night, Glenn gave us the infinite universe where there are no partless parts and we are always part of something bigger.
Another person who has studied infinity from the mathematical perspective is Peter Erickson and his work on infinitesimals.
Everyone who has looked at a globe can immediately see that South America and Africa fit together and probably were once attached to one another. Other parts of the globe exhibit the same characteristics by simple visual inspection such as the islands above Canada and Greenland.
But the fitting of the continents in the Pacific Ocean cannot be seen by simple inspection. This needs more help from the maps of the ages of the seafloors. And when you remove the sea floor by their ages from the youngest to the oldest, something amazing happens: all the continents fit together on a smaller globe.
Just take a look at this video and other videos by Neal Adams. They are very well put together and the logic behind the explanations are definitely something every critical thinker should look at.
The idea that the earth is expanding may at first be alarming, but too many things make sense. Even the size of dinosaurs make sense given that this theory says the earth had half the gravity during the time of dinosaurs. Here is a must read book for every critical thinker who needs to know some real reasons expansion tectonics is a far better theory than plate tectonics.
Physical Models of the Universe
The biggest downfall of Big Physics is its obvious lack of being able to tell anyone the physicality of the most basic things in the universe: light, gravity, magnetic fields for example. This lack of physicality is duly noted by those critical thinkers who are trying to come up with physical models that tell us exactly that.
There are three physical types of new models being proposed outside mainstream science:
By far the most popular model are aether models. This comes from the fact that light is almost exclusively “seen” as a wave and waves need a medium. Given that most critical thinkers require physicality for light, aether is a natural choice.
Aether models are specially meant to solve the problem of giving physicality to light and because of that, most aether theorists then try to propose a physical cause for gravity using their aether in some way or another. Aether also has to solve problems like the null result of the Michelson / Morely experiment, lasers, and transverse waves.
Structure models are those models that construct the universe from specific structures whether they be toroids, hellices, cyclons, etc.
Particle models have been around since the time of Newton with gravity being thought to be cause by gravitons. In fact, you will still see the graviton listed in some mainstream charts of possible particles in the universe.
Recently, more modern and complete particle models are emerged including the Particle Model from father/son teach de Hilster and de Hilster. In this model light, gravity, electricity, electron clouds, and magnetic fields are all the same particle traveling at speed “c”.
Lattice models are also another viable model for the universe when space is filled with a lattice structure. This structure allows for light, gravity, and even mass and movement.
Model Revolution Needs Support
As I have explained in my article “Model Revolution”, we are at a time where we have numerous types of models competing for the next models for the universe. What is most important during this revolution is for everyone to go at their model as hard as possible, stretching them to their limits.
And even more importantly, we need to support and encourage each other and each other’s models, even if we disagree. If the model is viable, we need to explore it. It will only be through everyone trying everything we can until some model comes to the top and becomes the next paradigm shift in physics and cosmology.