www.Distinti.com | Kick it up a Notch @rdistinti | Uploaded 7 years ago | Updated 16 hours ago
There is this [Adjective] engineer named Robert Distinti who claims that the reason why science has gotten nowhere with the [name for theory of everything] is due to a latent circular definition which undermines all science.
Distinti claims is that it is improper to have a definition of energy based on mass when mass and energy are interchangeable. That`s a circular definition. In case you don`t follow the logic, here is simple math that even a [person of limited scientific understanding] should be able to follow.
It begins with the definition of energy which is essentially force times distance (E=FD). Force is mass times acceleration (F=MA). Combining the two results in E=MAD.
Modern science recognizes that mass and energy are interchangeable because of E=MC^2; consequently, it is customary for scientists to replace mass with its energy equivalent M=E/C^2. An example of this is in particle physics where mass is represented as electronvolts/C^2.
If mass is then replaced in the definition of energy with its energy equivalent, then
E = EAD/C^2 which results in 1=AD/C^2 which is completely meaningless.
You can`t have a definition of energy based on mass when mass and energy are interchangeable.
Distinti claims that this is the reason why Quantum Mechanics (QM) and Relativity have not been able to reconcile together to form a single theory of both the big and the small.
In Relativity, mass is the critical material that both generates, and reacts to, the force of gravity; ironically, Relativity has no model of matter whatsoever. Mass is just a scalar variable found in the equations. Without mass, Relativity is completely pointless.
Conversely, Quantum Mechanics has the opposite problem. It attempts to understand matter; however, there is no real explanation of gravity. Like Relativity, mass is just a scalar property given to particles without any real understanding of its nature.
This impasse between Relativity and Quantum Mechanics has been going on for the better part of 8 generations, far exceeding Einsteins definition of insanity. Distinti`s solution to clear the log jam is to split the ambiguous definition of mass into inertia and matter. This is not very radical, because over 300 years ago, scientific progress required the disambiguation of weight from matter, now it is time to finish the job by disambiguating inertia from matter. After all, if Albert Einstein is correct that weight and inertia are equivalent, then it follows that both should be equivalently disambiguated from matter.
Distinti goes on to show that inertia and electromagnetic induction are the same thing. From there, the solution to the [name for theory of everything] is a trivial exercise that even a [a person of limited scientific understanding] can do it.
For more information see the trailer video T2 [link here] which covers this topic.
Thank you,
[name and whatever else]
[Adjective] awesome, crazy, odd, brilliant
[Name for theory of everything] Theory of Everything, TOE, Unified Field Theory, UFT, GUT
[Person of limited scientific understanding] physicist, child, average person, retarded monkey
[Link] that where we have to be careful most large magazines have spam filters that will reject anything containing a link and/or special formatting. Is probably best to do this following
Distinti has a youtube channel named rdistinti. On there you will find the video T2 which covers this material. He also has the video T0 which is a general overview of his work.
Email addresses
NYTIMES: scitimes@nytimes.com
Scientific American: Editors@sciam.com
Science magazine: science_editors@aaas.org
Discover magazine: http://discovermagazine.com/magazine/contact/editorial-contact-form
Popular mechanics: http://www.popularmechanics.com/about/a2922/contact-us/
Popular science: http://www.popsci.com/writers-guidelines
Journal Nature: http://www.nature.com/nature/authors/submissions/index.html
Smithsonian http://www.smithsonianmag.com/contact/article-submit-print-magazine/
National Geographic ngsforum@nationalgeographic.com
For others search google using
[magazine name] editorial submission
There is this [Adjective] engineer named Robert Distinti who claims that the reason why science has gotten nowhere with the [name for theory of everything] is due to a latent circular definition which undermines all science.
Distinti claims is that it is improper to have a definition of energy based on mass when mass and energy are interchangeable. That`s a circular definition. In case you don`t follow the logic, here is simple math that even a [person of limited scientific understanding] should be able to follow.
It begins with the definition of energy which is essentially force times distance (E=FD). Force is mass times acceleration (F=MA). Combining the two results in E=MAD.
Modern science recognizes that mass and energy are interchangeable because of E=MC^2; consequently, it is customary for scientists to replace mass with its energy equivalent M=E/C^2. An example of this is in particle physics where mass is represented as electronvolts/C^2.
If mass is then replaced in the definition of energy with its energy equivalent, then
E = EAD/C^2 which results in 1=AD/C^2 which is completely meaningless.
You can`t have a definition of energy based on mass when mass and energy are interchangeable.
Distinti claims that this is the reason why Quantum Mechanics (QM) and Relativity have not been able to reconcile together to form a single theory of both the big and the small.
In Relativity, mass is the critical material that both generates, and reacts to, the force of gravity; ironically, Relativity has no model of matter whatsoever. Mass is just a scalar variable found in the equations. Without mass, Relativity is completely pointless.
Conversely, Quantum Mechanics has the opposite problem. It attempts to understand matter; however, there is no real explanation of gravity. Like Relativity, mass is just a scalar property given to particles without any real understanding of its nature.
This impasse between Relativity and Quantum Mechanics has been going on for the better part of 8 generations, far exceeding Einsteins definition of insanity. Distinti`s solution to clear the log jam is to split the ambiguous definition of mass into inertia and matter. This is not very radical, because over 300 years ago, scientific progress required the disambiguation of weight from matter, now it is time to finish the job by disambiguating inertia from matter. After all, if Albert Einstein is correct that weight and inertia are equivalent, then it follows that both should be equivalently disambiguated from matter.
Distinti goes on to show that inertia and electromagnetic induction are the same thing. From there, the solution to the [name for theory of everything] is a trivial exercise that even a [a person of limited scientific understanding] can do it.
For more information see the trailer video T2 [link here] which covers this topic.
Thank you,
[name and whatever else]
[Adjective] awesome, crazy, odd, brilliant
[Name for theory of everything] Theory of Everything, TOE, Unified Field Theory, UFT, GUT
[Person of limited scientific understanding] physicist, child, average person, retarded monkey
[Link] that where we have to be careful most large magazines have spam filters that will reject anything containing a link and/or special formatting. Is probably best to do this following
Distinti has a youtube channel named rdistinti. On there you will find the video T2 which covers this material. He also has the video T0 which is a general overview of his work.
Email addresses
NYTIMES: scitimes@nytimes.com
Scientific American: Editors@sciam.com
Science magazine: science_editors@aaas.org
Discover magazine: http://discovermagazine.com/magazine/contact/editorial-contact-form
Popular mechanics: http://www.popularmechanics.com/about/a2922/contact-us/
Popular science: http://www.popsci.com/writers-guidelines
Journal Nature: http://www.nature.com/nature/authors/submissions/index.html
Smithsonian http://www.smithsonianmag.com/contact/article-submit-print-magazine/
National Geographic ngsforum@nationalgeographic.com
For others search google using
[magazine name] editorial submission
