I trust you will write to us about it when:
1. It is done.
2. Been experimentally corroborated.
3. Properly Published. No Pons and Fliescher bullshit please. Publish is a properly vetted scientific journal of venue like arXiv and make sure it is checked for error by professionals.
Until then all I see is hope and promises which = smoke and mirrors.
By the way, an eternally existing cosmos contradicts the second law of thermodynamics. How will you handle that? If the universe is infinitely old then we should all be cold and dead, but we are not. Do you like Fred Hoyle assume the "miracle" of matter being constantly created?
(1) I will post when I have updated the latest version of the paper.
(2) Experimental collaboration will take a great deal longer and lots of cash. After all the
largely inconclusive Gravity Probe B took decades of development and billions of dollars.
One of my undergraduate physics professors worked on theory for the project in the
(3) Properly published - unlikely any time soon since I have no avenue to publish in
ArXiv. Other "proper" publications often have a 2 or more year turn around. Many
publications will not accept work published elsewhere - which this has been/will be.
The 2nd law of thermodynamics does not apply to open systems - basic physics.
Something neglected in virtually all such discussions.
I have explained elsewhere [Physics_Frontier @ yahoogroups.com] that
non-linear QM provides the mechanism for matter/energy recycling. Matter
is not continually created but matter/energy continually recycled. Non-linear
QM prevents anything from being trapped anywhere indefinitely.
My gravity work is intimately integrated with my QM work which is also