John Ross wrote:
To the best of my knowledge and belief, my theory successfully predicts all known experimental knowledge of physics, chemistry and optics and does so better and simpler than any other theory. I am working on a list of predictions of new things that can be proved experimentally.
Does your theory in its current form reproduce all these predictions quantitatively, or just in terms of word-pictures? Have you made a detailed study of general relativity and the standard model of quantum physics to see if you understand all the main predictions made by these theories? Can you quantitatively reproduce GR's prediction of the precession of the perihelion of Mercury's orbit, for example (see http://phyun5.ucr.edu/~wudka/Physics7/Notes_www/node98.html ) or the extremely accurate prediction of the electron and muon magnetic moment anomaly by quantum electrodynamics (see http://latticeqcd.blogspot.com/2005/06/most-accurate-theory-we-have.html )? Can you predict more basic things like the interference pattern seen on the screen in the double-slit experiment, and how this pattern changes when you measure which slit the particle travels through?
Jesse
