Member

In Thomas Kuhn's book "Structure of Scientific Revolution" [4] , he describes a time where there is enough new data that allows for theories to compete to be the next paradigm shift. A model for the universe and physics itself has been in model revolution for over 400 years.

It used to be that journalism was based upon unbiased, investigative reporting that above all, would stick to the facts and present both sides of a story. But as we have become "woke" to the ways of modern journalism around the globe, we are now confronted not with journalists, but with "readers" or "mouthpieces" for news who read what they are told to read by their owners. Stories are carefully chosen to fit the narrative of the huge media companies and their sponsors and anything that goes against this narrative, will never make it to the airwaves and is often ridiculed.

Many dissident authors make statements that "aether was wrongly abandoned" thus causing physics to lose its way. This is disingenuous given there are other viable solutions or models for light. Because of an overwhelmingly emotional, intuitive, and experimental connection to waves as waves in a medium, it is easy for us to be seduced by the theory of aether. The dissident community must stop using phrases like "Aether was Abandoned" and replace it with a more truthful and appropriate phrase.

One of the great downfalls of modern physics both in the mainstream and in dissident science circles is the overuse of the word "Model". The biggest offender is the "Standard Model". Yet other supposed "models" or "theories" of the universe employ lots of math, lots of concepts, and lots of words without giving any physicality to anything they say or describe. And when physicality is given, there is no justification for the shape or attributes to those structures. This is a grand failure.

Until the emergence of a viable contender, aether theory for light has been one of the only alternatives to give physicality to light. With the emergence of the Particle Model for light, gravity, magnetic fields, electricity, and the atom as proposed by Robert and David de Hilster, it is now necessary to compare the two. Aether theory has had several hundred years to find a correct answer but to model light but has failed to do so for numerous reasons. This paper will compare and contrast the two models.

The two main objections to Expansion Tectonics by those in the scientific community are lack of a mechanism for expansion and mass increase, and the presence of subduction. This paper will show that these are now solved.

Using the Particle Model as proposed by de Hilster and de Hilster [1] [2], a physical explanation for the greater expansion of the earth in the southern hemisphere as opposed to the north is given. This explanation requires assumption that earth expansion and mass increase are real.

The electromagnetic spectrum including visible light is most often characterized by wave theory. But there are effects that indicate it has particle characteristics. Hence, there is an ongoing discussion of wave particle duality. There has been work trying to make a wave act like a particle. This paper uses a particle and provides a mechanism for it to have wave properties. If it is a particle, could the same particle that is the cause of EM radiation also be the particle needed for pushing gravity? And how does mass fit in?

Many scientists chase after the ultimate particle, the ultimate theory, all in the context of modern physics tools such as particle colliders. Yet, logic shows that there can never be a theory of everything, never have the ultimate particle, and the technique of smashing particles together is loosing proposition in science.

Mainstream science accuses dissident scientists including the Natural Philosophy Alliance of not being able to come to a consensus. The truth is, consensus is not healthy for finding truth nor is it the best philosophy for any part of serious human endeavor. In technology, the corporate world, engineering, law, politics, sports, and many other areas, consensus is a death sentence for progress and the worst way to come up with the best solutions to problems. It is consensus that has created the major problem in physics and cosmology and is the straw man setup by both the mainstream and the Natural Philosophy Alliance that has distracted it from the task which it is doing today: allowing for competing ideas to fight it out.

Neutrino existence has been embraced by numerous scientists with new theories despite grave problems. It appears to have desirable characteristics for many new theories. Yet, if scientists with new theories were to study the origin and evidence for neutrinos, they would discover that neutrino existence is a folly. This is all due to the neutrino's direct link to its progenitor: special relativity. If you believe special relativity to be wrong, then its bastard son the neutrino cannot exist. This is a report of some of the work by Argentinean physicist Dr. Ricardo L. Carezani.        

In the early 1940s, Ricardo Carezani, an Argentinean engineering student who later received his doctoral in physics, found that more than one frame in the Lorentz Systems in Relative Motion's derivation was, one of them, mathematically, and physically redundant. The removing the redundant frame and using a single one resulted in a new set of equations that are, conceptually in motion, Newtonian, have a logical explanation, even does not blow up at the velocity "c", and presents no paradoxes. The new "Autodynamics" equations have been subsequently used to improve current mainstream equations such as the Compton Effect, to derive Bohr's Atom without the need for wave equations, and to describe subatomic interactions without the need for the neutrino, etc. The math behind the redundant frame will be shown, the derivation of the new Autodynamics equations, as well as the mismatching exponent form Einstein's attempt to generate the Lorentz equations from special relativity.

It is quite obvious to most casual observers that South America and Africa were at one time joined. But it is quite unknown to al-most all that Asia, Australia and the Americas also were at one time joined. This evidence leads to only one conclusion: 200 million years ago, the earth's continents were all together on a much smaller orb and since then, the earth has been growing significantly. There is strong visual evidence that other bodies in the universe are also growing including other planets and moons. Although there currently is no one accepted mechanism that causes this growth, there are a number of scientists proposing mechanisms although it will probably take some time for these to be confirmed experimentally. In the mean time, evidence is mounting that the earth has grown including in the areas of geology, paleontology, flora and fauna fossil records, GPS, and simple physics that clearly show that the earth's diameter and mass have been increasing and continues to do. This evidence points to the most important question in science today: what is the mechanism that causes this growth? Although not covered in this paper, this mechanism must necessarily span the subatomic to the macro structures such as galaxies and everything in between.

Newton and Einstein equations for gravity both describe the path that bodies take in a gravitational field without providing a mechanism for that movement. Newton was the first to propose a possible mechanism for gravity, called a "fluxion", whose idea has evolved into the modern concept known as the "graviton". This paper describes and experiment whose purpose is to try and prove that the graviton exists using the concepts introduced by Argentinean physicist Dr. Ricardo Carezani.

Since the beginning of recorded history, scientists, artists, and philosophers who have thought outside the mainstream have been shut out from being able to publish their works in a formalized manner. With today's internet and new community-edited sites, this has all changed. The world-wide NeWiki project is the first community-edited encyclopedia for new theories and ideas for people who are seriously working outside the mainstream but cannot publish in a formal way. NeWiki invites those who are on the cutting edge of physics, astronomy, and any other discipline to publish their works in encyclopedia form. NeWiki is a single reference of new works from everyone around the world that anyone can reference. A companion website "Science Watchdogs" provides a more layman's approach to critical scientific thinking and includes critiques of current science news, reviews of books and media works, and a radio or "podcast" internet show interviewing people on the cutting edge of science.

(not available)