Compliments Get You Nowhere, But Keep Talking
From a student's short paper published in 2004, after some years' work. The hand-drawn line shows that either the universe is accelerating relative to light (violating the First Law of Thermodynamics) OR that light itself is slowing down. Prediction of GM=tc^3 precisely matches the "accelerating" curve. Despite this fit to data, scientists continue to peddle an accelerating universe with a repulsive "dark energy."
However, more and more people are seeing the light. This year the International Astronomical Union is devoting a 3-day symposium to the student's question:
Are the Fundamental Constants Varying With Space/Time?.
A recent commenter asked something so evocative that it should be printed here:
"So, you say that you can better 'conceptualise' this than all the thousands of physicists in the last about 90 years who have studied General Relativity, and better than the even more thousands of mathematicians who have studied Riemannian geometry for even more decades?"
This could be the week's biggest compliment, or a sympton of why new ideas meet such a high potential barrier. It is simliar to what our Czech friend wrote in his 2006 blog post.
"Start to advocate the nice Riofrio, a full-time researcher in cosmology who is suppressed by the sexist pigs in cosmology, despite having her "GM=tc^3" theory of the Cosmos that is far simpler, more important, and more testable than anything that Sean Carroll or any of his colleagues have ever invented during decades if not centuries of their fruitless and expensive efforts."
All one can reply is that discoveries like Relativity or Gravity are almost always made by lone researchers. A good idea takes almost no time to be processed by a single brain. However, a collaboration of 1000 physicists will take forever to accept a new idea. Some of those 1000 minds will not even read their group e-mails. A few of them will never, never accept the new idea. Somewhere along the way the originators of the idea will be told to shut up if they want to stay in physics. It should be axiomatic that a single determined mind is more capable than the group of 1000 minds.
History also shows that one determined mind will work 10, 20 years or however long it takes to solve a problem. No collaboration of 1000 minds could hold together that long, or agree on anything at the end. Epicycles, string theory, inflation and "dark energy" have all led to a divergence of ideas with no solution. Group minds are better for engineering projects like building spacecraft or bigger accelerators.
A student's education has uncovered great resistance to new ideas. It is a great surprise when a young mind solves a problem that has baffled many minds. Possibly for that reason, a "potential barrier" forms among all those jealous physicists. However, history has also shown that a single determined mind is more nimble than a group mind. Quantum mechanics shows that even high potential barriers can be tunnelled through.