Total Field Theory

[That Rascal Puff]

:hihi:

 

1/8/05 Monday

 

[b]*'Total Field Theory'.[/b]

Among Einstein's cohorts and contemporaries *this was a fairly currencied term, though there is no such eo facto title, per se, of any work known to this record. Consequently advised by several knowledgeable people to initiate a TOTAL FIELD THEORY thread as a SciForums landing zone for germane discussions, questions, repercussions, answers, diatribes and science scribes, augmentations, disqualifications, critiques 'n obliques; etceteras.

 

(May we all be chrono-spatial agronomists, outstanding in our fields?)

 

There are innumerable information resources on this subject via google, wikipedia and what have you (What you have). Whomever cares to harvest cogent informations from wherever is certainly welcome to deposit whatever gems may be seperated from the chaff (please be sure to properly accredit whatever source of information).

 

A Home Page reference relating to this thread as TOTAL FIELD THEORY, is accessible on the menu at http://forums.delphiforums.com/kaiduorkhon's forums, where (I think?) you may check in by clicking on 'My forums' in the upper left hand corner and check it out as a 'Guest' (to select TOTAL FIELD THEORY from the menu).

 

Home page 2: http://einstein.periphery.cc/

 

http://forums.delphiforums.com/kaiduorkhon's forums"]http://einstein.periphery.cc/

Lots of people know a good thing,

the moment the other fellow sees it first.

- Anon

:hihi:

[Queso]

hey there rascal,

as this forums moderator, you know...the bartender... i feel compelled to let you know that there is already a thread about total field theory started in the lounge already!

maybe this thread is different, i dont know! Im just the guy.

anyways, if you didnt know it was there...you should check it out.

and i will gleefully burn this thread to the ground, amidst.

[That Rascal Puff]

:rolleyes:

Thank you very much, orbsycli.

I was unaware there was another thread of the TOTAL FIELD THEORY title.

Hopefully this 'Alternative' qualification will suffice to deter any obliteration of my post, which proves to be a noteworthy trend in any number of http://www.net sectors. May it be considered that, the issued subject has been my life's work since 1957, under the title Gravity Is The 4th Dimension/The New Gravity/Extraterrestrial Physics 101, and that there are ten published copyrights, ranging from 1959 to 2005..

It has to do with finding phenomenological theoretical and hypothetical particle and wave considerations, different manifestations having the same causal identity, and that the apparent 'dualism' of continuity and discontinuity is functionally apocryphal.

I may only hope - and I certainly do respectfully request - that you do not extirpate, expunge or otherwise purge this post. 'Total field theory' is not by any means a new conceptual approach to or applied term for physical reality - space-time - at large; though there may be such titles, per se, I am unaware of them. It is likely that I and hopefully others may learn from the other post you speak of and that its author and myself may co-exist in reciprocal edification.

[infamous]

:rolleyes:

May it be considered that, the issued subject has been my life's work since 1957, under the title Gravity Is The 4th Dimension/The New Gravity/Extraterrestrial Physics 101, and that there are ten published copyrights, ranging from 1959 to 2005..

It most certainly is considered Puff...........good to see you back in the fray....................Infy

[Turtle]

:rolleyes:

 

Among Einstein's cohorts and contemporaries *this was a fairly currencied term, though there is no such eo facto title, per se, of any work known to this record. Consequently advised by several knowledgeable people to initiate a TOTAL FIELD THEORY thread as a SciForums landing zone for germane discussions, questions, repercussions, answers, diatribes and science scribes, augmentations, disqualifications, critiques 'n obliques; etceteras.

 

___I have stolen away while some paint dries, as I do care to try again to discuss the geometry of the physics of Gravity is the 4th dimension with That Rascal Puff & others who have actually read the exposition. I have read the works several times, & I found it cogent & in-line with some of Buckminster Fuller's geometry as well as my own research in Katabataks (residue & congruence theory).

___I wish to discuss how residues may represent the cyclic nature of the field (unified, total, etc. ) as described by Mr. Robertsons work.

___Nothing more; nothing less.