A Convergence of Minds on an Unified Theory

In this issue of the Journal of Theoretics, we have three different original articles that present an versions of an unified theory.  What amazed me now and over the last year, is not that there are so many different credible scientists looking into this but rather that there is an amazing similarity between these independently formulated theories.

The most important and most obvious commonality that I have seen here and in other papers, is that "Space" is not an physical volume that is devoid of everything.  But rather Space is thought to be a physical entity that exists with specific properties/characteristics.   This goes back to the view of Space as an aether but then goes down a different path than Relativity (Special and General) but still utilizing known scientific data and our current knowledge base.

The reasons that mankind has been so shortsighted in its understanding of space is that post-Einstein, to even mention it would mean ostricization from academia.  This is why we are seeing these theories being credibly developed outside the academic setting from scientists either retired or working in the public sector.  Also it is tough for our brains to comprehend the concept that Space actually physically exists.  It is like a fish not being aware of water because it is the least dense medium it exists in (until it is caught or jumps out of the water into the medium of air).  Likewise not so ancient man would have difficulty conceiving of a medium less dense than air.

Even traditional Relativists are starting to see the "light" (sorry about the pun).  But they are calling it by other names such as quantum vacuum, zero-point field, background field energy, and so on.  As to whether the former and latter theorist are talking about the same thing, the convergence is still pending.  It is hard for the Relativists to admit that they were wrong for looking down on these "alternative" or "radical" theories, so they may be taking refuge by calling the "aether of space" by the names that they use such as quantum vacuum, zpf, and so on.

But rather than saying, "I told you so," we should welcome the traditional relativists.  Maybe their theories will catch up with the rest of ours.

JP Siepmann, Editor

Journal Home Page

© Journal of Theoretics, Inc. 2000  (Note: all submissions become the property of the journal)