JohnM29111

Hey Guys, I'm going to step away. I don't agree with several of your assessments but don't think this forum is for me. Regarding what a TOE is, a TOE doesn't have to conform to any other theory. What it does have to do is explain all observed and verified phenomenon. For instance, both Dirac and Einstein showed GR could be replaced by a variable speed of light. Two different theories, one set of measurements. Going back 400 years, the epicycle orbit model satisfied many people with the same data later used by the elliptical model. The next challenge is to determine what is really observed, verified measurements. Two researchers to check out are Dr. Alexander Unzicker and Consa as I mentioned earlier. Unzicker presents good arguments challenging the standard model. He is also a good resource for the VSL theory. I did receive benefit in all this. I think I'm off on the negative energy concept as you pointed out. Its not material to my TOE but still the TOE must be revised in this area. Best, John

swansont: "It has no KE or PE when at infinite separation. But there’s an attractive electrostatic force, so KE increases and PE decreases as they move toward each other. In a bound state, energy must be released; the Bohr model predicts the KE is half of the magnitude of the PE" That is not correct. At 0 energy there is no attractive force. That's the point of saying the electron is infinitely far from the proton. There is no force to get it started moving toward the proton. If you can't get this how can you say my model is flawed?

Swansont: "As Mordred says, the Bohr model is superseded, but the negative energy in it is fully explained; it’s from the convention of saying the electrostatic potential energy of particles at infinite separation is zero." To quote from Wikipedia: "An electron in the lowest energy level of hydrogen (n = 1) therefore has about 13.6 eV less energy than a motionless electron infinitely far from the nucleus." If the electron has no kinetic or potential energy where is the energy derived from to then emit photons when it drops quantum states? Please point me to the explanation for how this is possible. Not to a theory but to verified measurements. Mordred: "QFT teaches us that particles are field excitations not bullet like objects" Have you read Consa's papers on QFT? KJW: "The forum rules require that one be able to discuss your theory without downloading a file or visiting an external website. So, I will ask you to elaborate on your claim about successfully explaining the fine structure constant." I won't repeat 45 pages of explanation to satisfy the forum rules. I didn't see that requirement when submitting the document. If that's the way it is this isnt the forum for me. MigL: "Being ambitious and getting out of your comfort zone, is one thing; lacking the required pre-requisite knowledge, and simply making W A Guesses is another altogether." Snide remark not appreciated. You haven't read it and make no constructive criticism. Where's the moderator?

Swansont: "As Mordred says, the Bohr model is superseded, but the negative energy in it is fully explained; it’s from the convention of saying the electrostatic potential energy of particles at infinite separation is zero." To quote from Wikipedia: "An electron in the lowest energy level of hydrogen (n = 1) therefore has about 13.6 eV less energy than a motionless electron infinitely far from the nucleus." If the electron has no kinetic or potential energy where is the energy derived from to then emit photons when it drops quantum states? Please point me to the explanation for how this is possible. Not to a theory but to verified measurements. Mordred: "QFT teaches us that particles are field excitations not bullet like objects" Have you read Consa's papers on QFT? KJW: "The forum rules require that one be able to discuss your theory without downloading a file or visiting an external website. So, I will ask you to elaborate on your claim about successfully explaining the fine structure constant." I won't repeat 45 pages of explanation to satisfy the forum rules. I didn't see that requirement when submitting the document. If that's the way it is this isnt the forum for me. MigL: "Being ambitious and getting out of your comfort zone, is one thing; lacking the required pre-requisite knowledge, and simply making W A Guesses is another altogether." Snide remark not appreciated. You haven't read it and make no constructive criticism. Where's the moderator?

I've developed a TOE and would like feedback on it. I'd particularly like comments on a proposed a modified Bohr atomic model. In the new model an electron in a hydrogen atom collapses to a particle at the n=1 quantum state. In higher quantum states the electron is a wave and has no mass. In the ground state the electron has mass and gravity keeps the electron in orbit around the proton. The other major change is electric charge is proposed to be emergent rather than constant. The changes account for all verified atomic observations and explain the stability at the n=1 ground state and the emission of energy (photons) below the 0 energy state. This TOE challenges several 'accepted' theories but I believe for good reason. The theories we have don't successfully answer core questions. For instance, we say the Bohr atom model is fully known and understood yet there is no explanation for negative energy. Also, why are there different physical laws for the cosmic, human and atomic scales? I welcome comments but hope people can reference actual observed and verified phenomena rather than simply point to popular explanations/theories. TOE Abstract: This paper presents a Theory of Everything (TOE). This theory aims to be a true TOE, one that accounts for all verified physical and human phenomenon. This theory shows our universe to be composed of several self-similar copies at scales descending in a logarithmic spiral sequence. As different as it is, this TOE is actually a grand simplification over current theories. Rather than different laws of physics applying to the atomic, human and cosmic scales, this TOE shows one set of laws applies to all scales. In doing this, incongruities between quantum physics and gravity are resolved and open fundamental questions are answered. For instance, this TOE successfully explains the flat rotation profiles of spiral galaxies, the fine structure constant and the long term stability and negative energy of the Bohr atom model. TOE Part I August 12 2024.pdf