Physics Researchers (an alias for now)

"PhysxResearchrs" and "Physics Researchers" are generic placeholders for our real names. We are not quite ready for all the media attention just yet, so we prefer to use these placeholders, for the time being. SHA256's of our real names included in: tinyurl.com/LogicArgs

Here's a screenshot from our spreadsheet, and our evidence in a simple graph. The curve in this graph, directly attributable to Special Relativity, almost exactly aligns with the 1998 results from the Type 1a supernovae observations (see refs in the 3rd of the 3 tweets above).

🔆🔆🔆 How to demonstrate for yourself that the 'dark energy' mystery can be explained with Special Relativity... (3 of 3)

🔆🔆🔆 How to demonstrate for yourself that the 'dark energy' mystery can be explained with Special Relativity... (1 of 3)

We have identified a crucial assumption of GR (i.e. velocity-dependent gravitational strengthening) that really needs to be tested, as it may be a fundamentally flawed assumption. To help kick things off, we have two Qu's for physicists interested in gravity (see figures)...

This may look devastating for our research, but none of this has any bearing on our neo-Lorentzian grav. hypothesis. In fact, it has revealed a critically important assumption of GR, which may be fundamentally wrong. It will be difficult to test, but should be looked into...

We assumed SR and GR don't predict any grav. strengthening in the vicinity of the plane thru the centre of a moving mass, orthogonal to its direction of motion. But both assumptions are wrong. Many thanks to Professor X for helping us gain greater clarity on the issue!

...and you can disregard our Exhibit #2 (what we referred to as "The Second Logical Paradox of General Relativity")...

...and you can disregard our Proof #3 in the same document (our Premise 3 in this proof is also incorrect)...

You can disregard our Figure 3.1 in our Research Project #3 (tinyurl.com/LogicArgs)...

@SpeedWatkins A NEW logical argument worth considering is the 'Gatekeeper Argument' (...for the existence of a God-like Supreme Gatekeeper / Authority of some kind, underpinning the ongoing, super-stable, unchallenged ("OSU") existence of the Laws of Physics). It is based on science & reason!

“God does not exist by logic alone unless you believe the ontological argument. I hope you don’t, because it’s not a good argument.” #JimHolt #WhyDoesTheUniverseExist

@JTCMD2 @Atheist_Bot Do u accept our Key Assumption... that there is a rational explanation for EVERY physical / naturalistic phenomenon, including the very deepest OSU existence of the Laws of Physics?

@JTCMD2 @Atheist_Bot If u accept our Key Assumption in Exhibit #4 (see 2 tweets back), then any physical / naturalistic explanation for the OSU existence of the Laws of Physics will run into a logical circularity problem. So there must be a non-phys. / non-naturalistic explanation for OSU existence!

In #MindscapePodcast 192, @nicoleyh11 & @seanmcarroll discussed Maxwell's Demon (thought experiment). DID U KNOW gravity CAN produce this dynamic separation of slow v fast particles? This is why the solar corona seems much hotter than Sun's surface! Fast radial velocities req'd!