LHC@home

http://www.geocities.com/xulfrepus/index.html

I like it because it's explained nicely.

I especially like the geometry of things... how electons radiate energy in two dimensions, how gravity is explained, how light bends.
http://www.geocities.com/xulfrepus/docs/fluxi.html

disclaimer: I am not a mathematician. I skimmed it.

Just don't tell Kepler and Newton that physics is really based on the Dodecahedron. :o
http://webs.advance.com.ar/simetriadelespacio/symmetry_space/ani-rings.htm

And don't mention it the the Astronomers either...
http://physicsweb.org/articles/news/7/10/5

Nor mention it to that Plato guy..
http://www.mlahanas.de/Greeks/PlatoSolid.htm

Apparently.. 'ether' is a dodecahedron.
"(Ether, Quintessence)-Dodecahedron"

Ok everyone.. everything physics has been explained. You can all go home now. ;)

---

I'm not the LHC Alex. Just a number cruncher like everyone else here.

Well, it is interesting, thanks for posting. IANAP so I don't have the greatest base in the subject, but it seemed to work out nicely.

It is supportive in that one how the author mentions Earth was thought to be the center at one time, then was totally disproved.

I think the geometry part of the theory was interesting, but I think that other aspects of the theory are testable (ie.. theres a way to disprove a theory) with experiments.

ie.. he explains the universe's red shift with the creation of more flux particles. So, one way to test it would basically run an experiment to see if our region of space is expanding...
That basically means grabbing some lasers and beam splitters and interferometers to see if your beam slows down over time.

I think people would have noticed laser beams slowing down if they repeatedly did the Morley Michelson experiment over time.
http://galileoandeinstein.physics.virginia.edu/lectures/michelson.html

---

I'm not the LHC Alex. Just a number cruncher like everyone else here.

The one thing that made me skeptical about your web site was the phrase 'quantum weirdness' and this line:

After traveling billions of miles and years, light just becomes tired and slows down.
If this were the case, then astronomers would have noticed oddities in eclipses, such as when Jupiter passes by a nearby star as opposed to passing in front of a distant galaxy.

I like the geometry, but it's a risk when proposing a theory to try to include 'explaining everything' with it because the skeptics will pick up on one of the explanations which doesn't work... and the next thing you know, you end up on crank.net because all they had to do was disprove one of many predictions made, and not the actual theory itself.

---

I'm not the LHC Alex. Just a number cruncher like everyone else here.