ScottTheSculptor

The data does not match exactly. why? The data is already collected. All the clocks that have ever flown in space. from this we can find the time gradient. The prediction is that leap second insertion corresponds to max and min radii to the sun. Variation shows that time is not stable. Why? I propose time "wind". Yes. you are correct. That is why I am arguing it here. And giving precise predictions. You guys have the math. This is a very logical argument. I can speak in relativistic terms if you wish. My education is substantial - but did not extend to sub-atomic interactions. Sorry but what I've read so far on the subject is mostly speculative. I am here to propose the "story problems" for you to decide if my theory follows your math. I can get quite detailed in my descriptions. I am not insulted, this was an expected post.

There are unexplained errors in the results. GPS time requires using the sagnac correction and "leap seconds" to correct the perceived time on the ground. Relativity still rules and meshes perfectly with my theory. The only difference is that "the speed of light" is variable. If you are in a different orbit around the sun your "speed of light" is different. All the other rules hold. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> additional info: I have a broken bit in my brain that makes it difficult to manipulate symbols. I can "describe" much of physics but can not do the math. I would not believe you until you proved your logical argument. I expect the same in reverse. But, fair warning. I am *extremely* logical. --- Writing down "leap seconds" fired off a logical extrapolation. I have evidence of proof in leap seconds. The orbit of the earth is elliptical. The annual leap second corrections forward and back correlate with my theory. The slowly increasing rate of time matches with the energy consumption of the sun over time. so far the the theory predicts/explains; dark matter dark energy gravity time wave particle dualism spacecraft clocks run faster when closer to the sun, slower when away. long lived radio waves from "upwind" in time. short lived radio wave from "downwind" in time star types by matter/ELMA mix proton magnetism leap seconds Why it takes starlight all that time to get here but doesn't decay. How is your theory holding up?

Apologies. I will stay in my defense now. I wasn't advertising, I was trying to show that it can not be disproven. The testable predicition is the absolute correlation with all airborne relativity studies - Hafele and Keating experiment and others. Sagnac correction is a bad patch to fix a broken theory. There are other "unexplainable" phenomena in astrophysics - I have sketchy data, are radiowaves missing from towards the center of the galaxy? In pure logic; shouldn't you welcome a theory that explains; dark energy, dark matter, gravity, time, and wave particle dualism over one that does not? The matter can not mix. only anti-spacetime is being sent to the anti-universe. (note; I am extremely logical and do not intend emotion, please do not infer any.) Anyone have data concerning clocks on spacecraft? My theory predicts that they be "mysterious". I can not find the data. Scientists love to talk about thing that they think that they have figured out, not so much about the unexplained. --- <- indicates passage of time Cool! http://tinyurl.com/3gd69g3 my theory explains spacecraft clock discrepencies. Clocks will run faster towards the sun and slower away from it. The data in the current discrepencies will also "not falsify" my theory.

Apologies. My theory does explain this argument. I will refrain from posting anywhere but in my own defense on my own thread

I did get one good logical argument before getting booted. What about radio galaxies, pulsars, radiating nebulae? Thought they had me stumped . . .well i was for a minute The jets in the galaxies and pulsars that we can identify are spewing time along with the jets. Once in the time flow these do not decay at the rate that you would expect. I am not sure but I have some sketchy data that says that we don't know why we can see this light - it shouldn't have made it here. This *would * be an explaination. also anyone know about seeing light coming from the galactic center? according to my theory it should be dark. . . .I kinda poked around but couldn't find the data. ? Excuse any gross errors . . .I got up 4:30 yesterday and shoulda crashed by now. I'll check my logic tomorrow.

Animals are *very* logical. If there were an advantage to war they would find and use it. It *is* a logical strategy in some survival scenarios.

First you have to realize the cognitive modes of humans. With this you can more closely predict behavior. "Normal" humans operate in a cognitive mode based on reverese error sorting of their memories. When under stress they revert to a cognitive mode used both for survival and is also the normal starting point for infants. The "emotional tag" sorting of memories allows for packs, tribes, etc. With it humans create emotional bonds with their memories. These memories will create a preference for some humans over others. The primitive cognitive mode reverts to pure logic, hardwired sensory/memory information and cuts all emotional bonds. So we run in "packs" and if stressed revert to animals. Doesn't matter if they are male or female. (though male do less "sorting"). The combination causes wars.

I *am* the "next Einstein" and I *am* just waiting for the world to catch up. . . link deleted See if you can break it

they predicted that it would come from an unexpected vector http://tinyurl.com/3hv4tnn Please please please Shoot it down. It makes sense to me but *is* a logic model. experimental data that already exists and that can confirm or deny would be nice. . . Cool, I just got my theory kicked off of physics forum for being speculation. Glad you guys have a place for the inquisitive mind . . .

Sculptors view of the problem. http://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=3227909&postcount=18 no really.