Heim's Theory of Everything

[chesh]

A few minor failures of the peer review publication process does not in any way undermine those enormous numbers of times when it did work and worked to correct problems.<br /><br />The Sokal episode is in fact an example of the corrective processes going on.<br /><br />Any one can conclude anything about the scientific method if they ignore enough of the facts.

 

[makuabob]

Ummm,... The Korean cloning episode is a good recent example. Lots of peer review there, to no avail.<br /><br />If you actually read the scientific journals, you will see retractions rather frequently. Also, many authors can choose from a list of potential reviewers--sort of like jury selection--for their article(s).<br /><br />It's like a toll road; if you want to "use" it, you got to pay the troll,... uh, toll.<br /><br /> And, if your work is truly ground-breaking, you have no peers. This is very much the case with Burkhard Heim's work.

 

[makuabob]

"As such, it's a valid scientific model about how the universe arose." It is more realistic to say that it is the "FAVORED scientific model." <br /><br />The Big Bang has problems. Inflation is one of them. It HAS to have happened for the Big Bang to work yet it is counterintuitive AND unexplainable!<br /><br />And, there is an oddity in the CMB. A paper by three scientists explains (in a complicated statistical analysis that I can't follow perfectly) that there is a non-Gaussian anomaly in the Cosmic Microwave Background. The method that was used (I'll ask my niece send me a copy or a link to an on-line posting) located where the anomaly was and the paper had a graphical representation of the non-Gaussian area.<br /><br />Grab ahold of something!... The image showed an ellipse; a very nicely shaped ring, viewed somewhat edgewise.<br /><br />What in the hell is something like that doing in the CMB?!<br /><br />I'll find the paper or post the image from it (if that is possible w/o copyright problems).

 

[yevaud]

Not graphical, but this is probably what you're referring to.<br /><br />Citebase: Anomalies in the Low CMB Multipoles and Extended Foregrounds<br /><br />Also several other related abstracts at the bottom of that page.<br /><br />Hope this helps. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Differential Diagnosis:  </em>"<strong><em>I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are</em></strong>."<br /> </p> </div>

 

[makuabob]

That's some of it. Thanks!<br /><br />Here also is an abstract. It mentions the "ring of pixels."<br /><br />http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005astro.ph..7246C<br /><br />This "ring" is a somewhat noteworthy discovery.

 

[yevaud]

It rang a bell. I browse ArviX and Citebase time to time, and sort of remembered it.<br /><br />*Oh my God, I am a middle-aged science geek* <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Differential Diagnosis:  </em>"<strong><em>I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are</em></strong>."<br /> </p> </div>

 

[makuabob]

" 'A new mobilizing factor may be the success in reproducing [17] the size and direction of the gravitomagnetic field effect of Martin Tajmar et al.' "<br /><br />Tajmar and De Matos have refined their equipment and raised the signal-to-noise ratio from 3:1 to 15:1. That gravity can be made to come and go at will is a fact that is not going away. The established laws of physics did NOT predict such an event.<br /><br />A peephole has been opened into a bigger, more complex and interesting universe thanks to Burkhard Heim's theory and the work of Tajmar and De Matos.<br /><br />Better fasten your seat belt and bring your seat backs and tray tables to their full upright position. We are about to take off.......