On May 9, 8:50 pm, "El Enrrabadore-mor"
wrote:
"Darwin123" escreveu na ...

On May 9, 8:03 am, "El Enrrabadore-mor"
wrote:
"Darwin123" escreveu na
...

Do you agree with the above picture?
At this point, I do not have a clear image of your apparatus. I
also don't fully understand the deviation from theory that you claim
to be seeing.

I've the deviation from theory in a 42+20 pages long so far, but
can be made much shorter once I finish the story.
Well, run it up the flagpole and see who salutes. Have you tried
to publish this work in refereed literature?
I know it is long, but the secret to refereed literature is to
chop it up and submit your theory a piece at a time. If you have
caught actual inconsistencies in the theory, it wouldn't take a long
article to point out the fundamental error. Then you develop it one
lemma at a time. If it is thrown out of one journal, and given no good
reason to doubt your work, rewrite it for another journal.
Some referees will throw it out of hand. However, you can point
out irrational statements to the editor. Sometimes they over rule the
stuffy physicist. The real danger is you may get detailed criticism
from someone who knows what he is talking about. Someone may actually
catch you at a mistake. Such reviewers have caught me several times.
It isn't pretty.