ANYTHING BUT THE IGNIS MODEL

ANYTHING BUT THE IGNIS MODEL

It's interesting, and becoming quite amusing to watch physicists scrabble around to come up with ‘legitimate physics’ explanations for the reality that springs from my hypothesis, without acknowledging my model's existence.

They are floating fantasies such as ‘dark photons’ to otherwise explain a particle-based [non-wave based] explanation for the Double Slit, carefully avoiding exploration of my materialising photon model.

They are beginning to explore the concept that gravity is not a fundamental force but consider peculiar ideas rather than attempting to refute the simple reality discovered by pursuing the implications of my photon model.

They are beginning to re-examine dark matter/energy but continue to overlook possible explanations based on mundane, long-held knowledge regarding the characteristics of ions.

They persist in failing to apply what they already know about ‘acceleration due to gravity’ to pursue an explanation for the accelerating expansion of the universe consistent with observed results without the need for exotic forces/fields/materials.

Others pursue the nature of time and time dilation as if they have an understanding of the physical [its PHYSICS, remember] concepts involved, and abandon all connections with true physics in discussing ‘time travel’ as if it's a legitimate topic for science.

As far as I'm aware, not one of the concepts being promulgated by physicists today to explain the fundamental basis of the universe follows a logical chain of reasoning to arrive at their ideas.

According to accepted methods of determining such things, physicists are extremely intelligent people but since its publication in February 2016 none has been able to refute my hypothesis. There has not been one counter argument put forward, let alone a logically reasoned one, despite direct approaches to many well known scientists requesting comment.

While many physicists lament the lack of significant progress in their field they appear to have little appetite for ideas likely to be disruptive to their careers, and even more significantly, to their egos. This, rather than an intellectual deficit, would explain what appears to be a consensus on prohibiting professional public discussion of the Ignis model.

One very visible physicist who has ‘taken no pleasure’ from publicly demolishing [and correctly so] invalid hypothesis being promulgated in physics, has ignored my request to do the same to my ideas if she is able to do so. Why could that be? Has she simply taken pity on me for some reason?

Others, including skeptics societies claiming to protect the public from nonsensical ideas, have declined to respond to specific requests to analyze my concept and to reveal its flaws. Each scientist and science journalist approached has also declined to respond.

If my hypothesis is wrong, I need a logically consistent English language [not mathematical] exposure of its flaws. The persistent absence of such exposure since early 2016, despite appeals to many quarters, leads me to conclude that my hypothesis is likely to be valid.

If my hypothesis is consistent with reality and physicists fail to incorporate it into their work, any meaningful progress in physics will continue to be impeded and quantum physicists who persist with current paradigms will eventually be revealed as professionally incompetent.

One American Astrophysicist who actually studied what I propose was not only unable to find fault with it in concept or reasoning but despite being afflicted with terminal cancer, became excited by the prospects it presented for a clear understanding of the nature of reality. He requested an ongoing dialogue with me that continued for his final months.

People obsessed with parading their own superiority and who delight in the public humiliation of others have, aside from a couple dismissing alternative ideas without studying them, been conspicuously absent from comment.

It has been suggested that my ideas are very specifically and deliberately given no public attention because to analyze them publicly would expose them to wider consideration and potentially undermine the very basis of the careers of all credentialed physicists.

Humans have accomplished marvelous things in science and technology despite being in possession of a flawed understanding of the fundamental workings of the universe.

The pioneers in physics deserve the highest praise for the groundbreaking work they did in providing their successors with inspirational ideas with which to initiate their thinking.

Today's scientists, armed with information not available to their forebears, have no defence against their responsibility to re-analyze previous, less informed conclusions to reveal error and progress toward a genuine understanding.

Where has the truly analytical, what-if logical thinking gone?

Are we destined to continue along a path of pseudoscience and esoteric explanations while quite easily understood concepts could be available to all?

As the march of time erodes my remaining opportunities to obtain the necessary attention to the concepts I put forward, I am emboldened to relate them to Einstein’s great work.

An intelligent, open-minded and determined seeker of knowledge would discover endorsement of, AND PHYSICAL EXPLANATION FOR Einstein’s fundamental speed limit, his time dilation, his gravitational lensing and more, in my work, all arising from his photon as a discrete entity.

Photons with the characteristics I ascribe to them would, while challenging current paradigms, provide a tool to enable explanation of ALL physical phenomena.

EM interaction with ‘matter’, thermal expansion and other phenomena would be clearly understood in the light of a true understanding of the nature of a photon of energy.

I suggest that almost anyone capable of visualization and logical analysis [plus persistence beyond a ‘sound bite’ attention span] would be capable of building a comprehensive picture of the universe when armed with a clear photon understanding.

An understanding of the nature and behavior of the photon reveals all else in a progression of knowledge acquisition akin to the falling of dominoes.

I seek neither fame nor fortune. Agnosco Ignis can take credit, if any credit is due, for my ideas. My wish is to see them understood and acknowledged as valid before I go.