Indian Journal of Science and Technology (Peer-Reviewed): Astronomy Research

[Mod. note: followup-to set, et caveat emptor -- mjh]

Binary star motion is computationally linked to quantum structures:
Author is seeking ArXiv endorsement within the Astrophysics or General
Relativity and Quantum Cosomology section for the article:

http://indjst.org/archive/vol.4.issu...r11jamal-5.pdf

If you are interested in endorsing this peer-reviewed article for either
section please feel free to contact the author at the email on the
article.




--
Jamahl Peavey

Originally Posted by Jamahl Peavey[_2_]

[Mod. note: followup-to set, et caveat emptor -- mjh]

Binary star motion is computationally linked to quantum structures:
Author is seeking ArXiv endorsement within the Astrophysics or General
Relativity and Quantum Cosomology section for the article:

http://indjst.org/archive/vol.4.issu...r11jamal-5.pdf

If you are interested in endorsing this peer-reviewed article for either
section please feel free to contact the author at the email on the
article.




--
Jamahl Peavey

Such a very amazing link!
Thank you so much for your post.

Originally Posted by katherinerankin74

Such a very amazing link!
Thank you so much for your post.

You are very welcome, please pass it on. I am going to make an American debute soon.

Originally Posted by Jamahl Peavey

You are very welcome, please pass it on. I am going to make an American debute soon.

This paper is dedicated to all levels within the Astronomy and Engineering community. The Sofia Technical Univeristy of Bulgaria "Physics Days 2011 Conference" presented the results of this paper to the scientific community. Again, thanks to the Astronomy community that continues to make measurements critical to accepted theory.

Originally Posted by Jamahl Peavey

This paper is dedicated to all levels within the Astronomy and Engineering community. The Sofia Technical Univeristy of Bulgaria "Physics Days 2011 Conference" presented the results of this paper to the scientific community. Again, thanks to the Astronomy community that continues to make measurements critical to accepted theory.

Einstein's General Relativity was tested against the binary star systems in the article,"Binary precession solutions based on synchronized field couplings" and in most cases GR failed to produce results consistent with observation. This is a fact the Astronomy journals continue to make in the form of peer-reviewed publications, yet our Astronomy magazines have yet to recongnized it. How else can GR hold the position of a theory of perfection in light of what is known to be true?

Originally Posted by Jamahl Peavey

Einstein's General Relativity was tested against the binary star systems in the article,"Binary precession solutions based on synchronized field couplings" and in most cases GR failed to produce results consistent with observation. This is a fact the Astronomy journals continue to make in the form of peer-reviewed publications, yet our Astronomy magazines have yet to recongnized it. How else can GR hold the position of a theory of perfection in light of what is known to be true?

My research is being presented as a scientific report to the Astronomy and engineering-technology communities. This scientific report is not being presented to change anyones perspective. A perspective is a lens through which we interpret the scientific facts. If you believe GR accurately describes the motion of all know bodies in the universe then any facts to the contrary is easily explained away. If you believe GR does not described the motion of anything in the universe then any facts to the contrary is easily explained away. I believe GR and Newtonian mechanics are the best gravitational field theories we have today. However, I do not believe the most power long range force in the universe (Electromagnetism) can be disregard when producing a model which explains the motion of binary star systems completely. Einstein's goal was to unify GR with Maxwell's Electromagnetism. My research offers the first successfully tested interface between the gravitational and electromagnetic field using quantum structures.

Originally Posted by Jamahl Peavey

My research is being presented as a scientific report to the Astronomy and engineering-technology communities. This scientific report is not being presented to change anyones perspective. A perspective is a lens through which we interpret the scientific facts. If you believe GR accurately describes the motion of all know bodies in the universe then any facts to the contrary is easily explained away. If you believe GR does not described the motion of anything in the universe then any facts to the contrary is easily explained away. I believe GR and Newtonian mechanics are the best gravitational field theories we have today. However, I do not believe the most power long range force in the universe (Electromagnetism) can be disregard when producing a model which explains the motion of binary star systems completely. Einstein's goal was to unify GR with Maxwell's Electromagnetism. My research offers the first successfully tested interface between the gravitational and electromagnetic field using quantum structures.

Why is Einstein's work not the foundation for determining what Dark Matter is? Gravitational Lensing is the way Dark Matter is detected (mapped) and Gravitational Lensing is a Space-Time phenomena. In my research, Dark Matter appears naturally as an amplitude in what Einstein described as a space-time structure. If this is true, then it explains why light is bent but does not interact with Dark Matter. It also explains how the structure can speed up the frequency of stars in a system. Amplitudes naturally increase the frequency of waves and orbital frequencies. Particles appear to have little to do with Dark Matter and Einstein's Theory. Remember, Gravitons are not a part of Einstein's theory. Nor is current approaches to unify his theory with electromagnetism and the other forces. Particle physicist presence in Astronomy gave birth to WIMP's just as mathematicians presents in physics gave birth the multiverse. Predictions are statements at theory makes before a discovery. If WIMP's are Dark Matter then why didn't the associated theory naturally predict its existence.

Originally Posted by Jamahl Peavey

Why is Einstein's work not the foundation for determining what Dark Matter is? Gravitational Lensing is the way Dark Matter is detected (mapped) and Gravitational Lensing is a Space-Time phenomena. In my research, Dark Matter appears naturally as an amplitude in what Einstein described as a space-time structure. If this is true, then it explains why light is bent but does not interact with Dark Matter. It also explains how the structure can speed up the frequency of stars in a system. Amplitudes naturally increase the frequency of waves and orbital frequencies. Particles appear to have little to do with Dark Matter and Einstein's Theory. Remember, Gravitons are not a part of Einstein's theory. Nor is current approaches to unify his theory with electromagnetism and the other forces. Particle physicist presence in Astronomy gave birth to WIMP's just as mathematicians presents in physics gave birth the multiverse. Predictions are statements at theory makes before a discovery. If WIMP's are Dark Matter then why didn't the associated theory naturally predict its existence.

Is MACHO still a valid theory for Dark Matter? and Stellar/Atomic-Self Similarity appears to be the bases for two interesting articles. What is more interesting is how major peer-reviewed journals determine what is significant to publish and how science magazines determine what is significant to present to the public?

"Binary precession solutions based on sychronized field couplings" shows the symmetry between four major quantum structures and the motion of binary stars, not stars modeled in a lab but the binary stars Astromers analysis through their optical telescopes. The solution presented in this article points directly to what Dark Matter is and it is clearly not a MACHO or WIMP. I think I know how the major journals and science magazines determine what to publish.