🚀 go-pugleaf

Ross Tessien wrote (via cyrano):

> I chose a fundamental approach I expected to go no where, and it
> was based on no presently held tenet.  I made one simple
> assumption, "There exist in nature, no *tensile* means for
> transferring action".
> 
> This assumption, after years of work, has resulted in  dynamic
> and geometric descriptions for the geometries of things like
> electron, photon, nucleon, mass, etc.
>
> Had I begun with the pre-conceptions of present physics, I would
> have been convinced that energy and mass are the same thing, just
> in two different forms.  But because of this new approach, it is
> clear to me that mass is "amount of aether", and that the
> universe is an ocean of aether, that "particles" are localized
> high density resonances in that same aether.
>
> what this means is pretty simple and shocking.  Our interpretation
> of mass to energy conversion is wrong.  Instead, we should be
> studying the effect of two standing waves interferring and
> interacting, and hence fusion leads both to the acceleration of
> the new resonant geometries, AND, to an emission of the excess
> aether the new geometries of resonances (aka particles) cannot
> confine.  In short, fusion leads not only to the acceleration of
> the particles, but as well, to pushing the rest of the universe
> away from that location via the emission of a new patch of buzzing
> aether.
>
> This has tremendous cosmological concerns, alters GR substantively,
> and perhaps most importantly, explains what gravity is.  This model
> **anticipates** the nuclear strong, weak, electric, gravitational,
> **and** cosmological forces simply by virtue of the fact that the
> resonances I work with interfere with one another in that many
> different ways.  No more, no fewer.  (well, actually there are
> other more subtle interactions of less importance, and these are
> known to us too in BEC's, condensed matter, phase transitions etc.

So, this model alters GR substatively and anticipates the
various known interactions.  Does it also anticipate that the
strong and gravitational interactions are nonlinear in character?
That would be surprising in the absence of assumptions built into
the model that are put there by hand precisely so they would
anticipate those interactions.  Does the model correctly predict
(numerically) the precession of the perihelion of Mercury, for
example?  Does it predict the existence of charmonium?