Tom Roberts wrote:
> David Thomson wrote:
> > I am providing an *informed* opinion.
>
> Not really. You have been reading your own stuff too much, and have not
> been reading the physics literature. Especially the experimental record.
> Most of what you say is already refuted experimentally -- you need to
> INFORM yourself about that.

You need to take a course in philosophy and science so that you can
tell the difference between the two.  My theory is based entirely upon
the empirical data that modern theories are based upon.  What is
different is that I interpret the data differently.  Instead of being
blinded by the denial of the existence of Aether, I have allowed the
data to lead me to the truth.  The truth is that the Aether does exist
and is fully quantifiable.

The only thing I reject from the scientific literature is the
prejudiced and bigoted philosophies concerning the meaning of the data.
 Fortunately for me and too bad for you, my fully quantified philosophy
is much simpler and more meaningful than the philosophies you
arbitrarily choose to believe.

Whereas you believe in wave/particle duality, probability functions,
and force particles philosophies, I have a completely quantified
philosophy *plus* the addition of several new laws of physics.  I have
a fully quantified Unified Force Theory.  This alone is major
ammunition that blows the prevailing nonsensical philosophies out the
window.

The only thing preventing you from reviewing my theory and giving it
due process is your prejudiced and bigoted view against the Aether.
You are more interested in preserving your pet Special Relativity
philosophy than finding the simplest and most useful system of physics.

> One place to start:
> C.Will, _Theory_and_Experiment_in_Gravitational_Physics_.
> It discusses most if not all of the experiments I have mentioned as
> refuting your claims.

I have "Gravitation" by Misner, thank you.  I am well aware of the
physical evidence.  The physical data is what my theory is founded
upon.  Like I said, you need to understand the difference between
philosophy and science.  It is okay to have your own philosophy about
what the data means, but it is not okay to claim your philosophy is the
inherent decipherment of the data and mine is not.  You have no claim
to absolute philosophical knowledge and we both claim the same data.

Dave