Ken S. Tucker wrote on Fri, 06 Jun 2008 11:01:14 -0700:

On Jun 6, 3:52 am, "Juan R." González-�lvarez
wrote:
Ken S. Tucker wrote on Thu, 05 Jun 2008 09:12:35 -0700:



On Jun 5, 5:28 am, "Juan R." González-�lvarez
wrote:
Ken S. Tucker wrote on Wed, 04 Jun 2008 13:20:16 -0700:

On Jun 3, 3:49 am, "Juan R." González-�lvarez
As i already pointed here several times, I am working in an
*extension* of both SR and GR. The theories of SR and GR are
recovered in a well- defined limit of a more general and
sophisticated theory.

The theory reduces to GR and explains *why* the speed of gravity
in GR coincides with the speed of gravity. However this is not
true in the generalized theory.

The new theory is a sophisticated formulation based in
mathematics and physics developed in last few years. Technically
it is a nongeometrical DPI many-body theory in Liouville space
with universal evolution parameter.

As already said GR results are obtained as special case and the
limits of geometry and spacetime fixed :-)

Your accusation of using 1908 physics and maths looks thus
completely irrelevant and your re-accusations look very unfair
:-)

Ok, who is your target market, (evidentally not me, as you Juan
insist).

Simple, people who do not make unfair criticisms about works he
never read first :-)

Take a look at this article and provide a criticism, (it's a couple
of straightforward pages),
http://physics.trak4.com/modern-spacetime.pdf

Also, people who take five minutes to read references provided
instead repeating mistakes were corrected in print :-)

Well Juan, I have looked, so far I find your mathematics and physics
ambiguous. Why don't you write up a synopsis/essay as I have demo'd
above, as a link for the group.

I'm interested in the new predicticts your theory makes, apart
from our classicals. Ken

Oh, i am too :-)

The dual theory make several interesting predictions (for both
electrodynamics and gravity) and also solves well-known difficulties
with the former theory (when interactions travel at c).

That is, the new theory gives right answers for questions that
former theory gives us wrong.

If you had taken a look to references cited you would already know
at least this part :-)

Good, we are looking forward to a synopsis. Regards Ken

Oh, but was done, including equations that have not spacetime
representation and need of a more *general* relativistic theory. If you
did not read before replying is a different question :-)

I sometimes have a problem understanding what your trying to say, but
anyway, I wish you good luck with your new book, and please post reviews
of it, and I'm looking forward to reading it.

What book Ken?

Are you sure you are replying me? or who you are? or do you just dream
that and typed? :-)


--
Center for CANONICAL |SCIENCE)
http://canonicalscience.org