Dear SFN Member:

 

I am not a physicist, but am a theoretical thinker. I am looking to publish a book and would like to include other theory and commentaries related to the core topic. It is an essay on Relative Gravity.

 

In looking at Kepler, Newton, Einstein and even Faraday, although their thinking was for their particular context, they shared symmetry in principles. For example, a circle with respect to a wheel. This symmetry is exploited in the essay that I wrote as abstract properties:

 

Relative Gravity is the potential energy of bodies purported as amplitude in kinetic energy and expressed in the form of a resonant frequency between them.

 

The resonant frequency is considered a shared fundamental that is measured through their level of superposition. The kinetic expression is subject to the disposition of the bodies’s potential uniquely.

 

The essay's purpose is to demonstrate a basis for the unification of the four known forces via their abstract properties. The approach is through what I call Object Oriented Science. The essay is located at http://relativegravity.wordpress.com/ as a PDF.

 

I welcome well founded commentaries and referenced theory that can be viewed as controversial, supportive or even can a-line with it as scientific theory. I welcome your contribution for review for inclusion for publishing. Book commissions would be split evenly to all authors.

 

Thanks for reading this,

 

Orion Daley -

A suggestion: Take another hard look at Newton's Third law, this time within the framework of General Relativity.

Fq = Amplitude/Velocity. I see this as a common property.

Fq = Amplitude/Velocity. I see this as a common property.

?? What is this and where did this come from?

 

Relative Gravity is the potential energy of bodies purported as amplitude in kinetic energy and expressed in the form of a resonant frequency between them.

 

The resonant frequency is considered a shared fundamental that is measured through their level of superposition. The kinetic expression is subject to the disposition of the bodies’s potential uniquely.

 

This sounds like word salad to me. All of these terms have petty specific definitions, which are at odds with how they are being used here. Further, they imply a mathematical relationship, which is how things are usually expressed, and what is expected in physics.

Fq = Amplitude/Velocity. I see this as a common property.

 

This isn't Newton's third law. This is a formula used when measuring properties of waves.

 

Newton's third law is every action has an equal and opposite reaction.

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

i totaly agree with you

Edited March 3, 201015 yr by Phi for All
Advertising links removed by Moderator