"Bill Sheppard" wrote in message...
...

'Lo Paine
Appreciate the feedback. As was emphasized to you
previously on the 'primacy of math fixation', the argument is not with
the application of math, but with the application of math _to a flawed
premise_. The flawed premise in this case is the void-space
paradigm(VSP), the axiom that space is functionally void-- which
automatically precludes the existance of a medium amenable to expansion,
compression, and flow.

OG stipulates that science be "rigourous". Well Uncle Albert rigourously
applied math for his last 30 years to the unification of gravity. And he
came up zip. Why? Because his math, perfect as it was, was predicated on
the VSP, which prohibits a dynamic flowing medium.

This does not mean that we should give up on math, Bill. Just as
Copernicus and others found fault with Ptolemy's math and used
their own mathematical prowess to show that Earth goes around
the Sun instead of vice versa, we may use your description above
to conclude either that Einstein's math became faulty at some point,
perhaps due to his aging process, *or* that the VSP is indeed an
incorrect paradigm. In either case, it will be math that resolves the
mystery. It *must* be math, and this *must* be accepted. The
problem of a grand unification theory will not be definitively solved
until math is correctly applied to the challenge.

As far as Wolter's connecting gravity and the strong force, exactly the
same thing was echoed years later by Lindner and Warren, with Lindner
calling it the 'hadronic flow' at the level where the flow enters the
nucleus.
Wolter saw electroweak as operating entirely within the
nucleus, and not participating _directly_ in spatial flows 'out here' in
the spacetime domain. Thus EW was not included in his Unified Field of
Spatial Flows. EW is certainly real as you point out, and we have clear
evidence of it in radioactive decay ejecta from 'down in the hole'
(sorta like fulmanating Drano ejectag).

And modern science also sees the strong force as operating
entirely within the nucleus. I still say the no-brainer is that the
weak force is connected with large-scale gravity (the weaker
of the two large-scale forces), while the strong force is then
connected with large-scale magnetism (the stronger of the two
large-scale forces).

Since science does not consider the
strong nuclear force as being an inverse
square force, science of course does not
accept these associations.

Science does not accept the existance of a flowing spatial medoum.
That's the rub.

And there seem to be good reasons for this.

...i believe that many of Wolter's ideas
would be confirmed if math were to be
applied to them.

Wolter stated that the math is already in place in the equations of SR
and GR and that no further math is needed. Once the reality of the
expansible/ compressible/ flowing medium is recognized, the math will
extrapolate directly to it. And G.U. will follow as the unsolicited,
fortuitous spinoff.

I'm afraid Wolter appears to have been wrong on this point.
More math is most definitely needed, even if only to *confirm*
the "reality of the expansible/compressible/flowing medium."

The only other possibility would be that
someone else will apply the math and
take credit for Wolter's confirmed ideas.
This seems to be what you want to
happen.

'Twon't never happen under the VSP. As exemplified by OG, Zinni, Scott
and crew, the 'no medium' doctrine is here to stay for the forseeable
future. And that's fine. That is their truth, their reality. As Wolter
would say, it's their referance frame which is to be respected as long
as they are happy with it. oc

I suppose i agree with this in principle, but in reality i have to be
thankful that there were many people in history that did not follow
this line of thinking. Most of these men and women were, right or
wrong, ridiculed during their lifetimes. But if they *were* right,
then their rightness came out eventually.

It's precisely this kind of thinking that kept Ptolemaic ideas alive
for so long. We can be thankful that Copernicus did not cave like
this. Bill, do you *really* think that it's okay to allow ignorance to
reign just because people are so happy being ignorant???

Let me ask you something... Why do you think the VSP is so damn
deeply imbedded in science today? I know the story of the historic
religious origins, but that can't be the *whole* story. There must be
more to account for the rigorous way the VSP continues to be
defended by science! Why do you think that is?

happy days and...
starry starry nights!

--
Do you have yourself a dream?
Are you burning with desire?
If no dream, you have no steam
To fan your ember into fire!
Do you have yourself a dream?

Paine Ellsworth