Einstein Cartan Evans Theory

21 February 2009

Prof Myron Wyn Evans
Professor, United Kingdom
http://www.aias.us,%20www.atomicprecision.com,%20www.steriwave.com,%20www.telesio-galilei.com/

Mr Thomas Widlar
retired

Physics and Astronomy

Physics and Astronomy (miscellaneous)

Synopsis of Einstein Cartan Evans (ECE) Theory

This is a well established unified field theory which by some measures is the leading unified field theory at present. It completes the general relativity of Einstein by incorporating spacetime torsion into the equations of dynamics and electrodynamics. It unifies general relativity and quantum mechanics using geometry, and rejects the Copenhagen indeterminacy in favour of objectivity and causality following several well known experiments that show the incorrectness of indeterminacy. The ECE theory has been developed extensively in a series of 126 source papers to date on http://www.aias.us/ and http://www.atomicprecision.com/ . It covers all the main areas of physics, chemistry, differential geometry and electrical engineering. It is an engineerable theory and devices based on it are research and development by Steriwave Plc. ( http://www.aias.us/). ECE theory has therefore entered into its industrial stage. The theory has been extensively published in refereed journals (see further reading below), and has been generating intense interest for five years on http://www.aias.us/ and http://www.atomicprecision.com/. The scholarship leading to ECE theory has exposed sveral major flaws in the standard model of physics, which has become obsolete and which has been replaced in practical terms by ECE theory. This page starts with numerous endorsements of the theory and my work in general, and then gives a comprehensive description of the ECE theory, refuting in great detail a few remarks that have been made. These criticisms have been repeatedly rejected by the overwhelming majority of scientists and industrialists who now regularly study ECE theory worldwide.

Some Recent Comments on ECE Theory

1) "The progress of ECE theory is remarkable in a historic context since physics has not progressed in its foundations over the last hundred years. Einstein's gravitation and quantum mechanics dominated the whole of the twentieth century. Earlier attempts at unification of physics during that century were highly mathematical and of no practical relevance. In contrast, ECE uses the SAME equations for electrodynamics and gravitation / dynamics. New effects are predicted quite easily and they can be applied to practical problems. Elementary particle theories have been rationalized geometrically by ECE because theories with arbitrary symmetry can be incorporated in the framework of Cartan geometry. As is required for a generalization of existing theories, the separate theories can be derived from ECE as special cases. The mathematics have been known since 1925 and are therefore rock solid. Criticism of the mathematics is therefore futile. Some critics mix up mathematical methods with the underlying axioms. The latter can only be tested experimentally as usual, and cannot of course be proven or disproven mathematically. So this type of criticism merely introduces another philosophy. It is not the Baconian method. (Prof. Horst Eckardt, AIAS Director and Steriwave Director, Professor of Physics MEU).

2) "We are aware of your pioneering work and have the pleasure and honour to invite you to submit a paper (to a 2009 special Elsevier journal issue on hot topics in computational an theoretical nanoscience). My colleagues and I strongly believe that ECE theory will provide solutions to some outstanding problems of nanotechnology. Your outstanding theoretical work naturally and elegantly interprets our experimental results." (Prof. C-C Cefalas, Director of Research at the National Hellenic Research Foundation in Athens, Greek EEC Representative for Nanotechnology.)

3) "From many discussions (with Prof. Cefalas and colleagues) I well understand that the experimental work we did on nanotechnology and descaling strongly supports the theory of spin connection resonance in ECE theory" (Prof. Spomenka Kobe, Head of Department of Physics, Jozef Stephan Institute.)

4) "Prof. Evans has to all appearances succeeded in achieving a century old aim in physics, the development of a unified field theory. Albert Einstein attempted from 1925 to 1955 to reach this goal but failed. Evans completed the task by augmenting Einstein's spacetime concepts of general relativity with the principles of broader geometry". (Prof. Alwyn van der Merwe, Editor in Chief of "Foundations of Physics" (1975 - 2007), Editor in Chief and Founding Editor, "Foundations of Physics Letters" (1988 - 2007), Series Editor in Chief and Founding Editor, "Fundamental Theories of Physics", Former Queen Victoria Scholar, Profesor Emeritus in the University of Denver.)

5) "Myron has devoted his life to the betterment of mankind through advancement of science, when many were and still are against his progressive approach to the subject...... he has taken concepts of physics proposed by Einstein, Heisenberg and Dirac, to name a few, to new levels, levels that will allow significant technological advancement and improvement in lifestyle for his fellow countrymen in the years to come." (Dr Douglas Lindstrom, sometime Alberta Research Council, Canada).

6) "Physics is geometry - objective and deterministic. After a century of scientific uncertainty and void, the new ECE theory of Myron Evans establishes that there is no Higgs mechanism or boson, no strings or superstrings, no need for renormalization, no need for gauge theory, no missing mass or dark matter in the universe, no exotic new particles, and no singularities in nature (that is Big Bang and Black Holes)." (Dr. Gareth Evans, sometime SERC Advanced Fellow.)

7) "Finally, over half a century after Einstein made his contributions of general and special relativity, Myron Evans, following in the tradition of Einstein, accomplished the impossible." (A. D. de Bruhl of Georgia, science author).

8) "In my fifty years of teaching physics as a Professor, former Chairman and as an organizer of international physics conferences attended by Nobel Laureates I have never known anyone of the genius and productivity of Myron Evans. He has created a grand unified field theory that has achieved what Einstein only dreamed of doing." (The late Prof. John B. Hart, Chair of Physics, Xavier University, sometime U.S. Navy Commander.)

9) "Dr Evans built up a new, geometrical unified field theory of all fundamental interactions based on a Riemann space endowed with both curvature and torsion. He thus realized the old Einstein dream. What's more, Evans' grand unified field theory has a number of far reaching technological applications, for example in medicine and energy production." (Prof. Roberto Mignani, University of Rome).

10) The ECE Ansatz is brilliant, powerful, natural, and economical. ECE provides a far more economical description of orbits than that given by Einstein and his co-workers. Prof. Diego Rapoport, (Argentina), full professor and mathematical physicist.

11) "ECE theory could soon be recognized as the crowning achievement of the twenty first century (in physics)." (Prof. Kerry Pendergast, MEU, leading British astronomer and member of the Court of the University of Aberystwyth).

Some General Comments

12) (The fundamental contributions) by Evans (lead) to a better understanding of the enigma of the photon than can be offered by conventional theory. The research by Evans is thus of great importance to the scientific community and to the further development of modern physics and chemistry" (Prof. Bo Lehnert, Royal Swedish Academy Stockholm, King of Sweden Gold Medallist.)

13) "I agree that the classical theory of vacuum fields is incomplete, and your discovery of B(3) is very attractive and interesting. I agree that B(3) must be longitudinal and observable." (Prof. Dr. Miroslaw Kubak, Planetarium and Astronomical Observatory, Grudziadz, Poland, 19th Dec 1994).

14) "Recently Evans has derived....a new approach to electrodynamics, in particular the generation of an elementary magnetostatic flux by the photon. His paper is highly interesting and certainly deserves publication in Phys. Lett. A" (The late Prof. Dr. Stanislaw Kielich, Head of Non-Linear Optics, Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznan, Poland, circa 1993, now the Stanislaw Kielich Institute).

15) "Many a good Welshman and many of the world's finest scientists have had difficulties like yours. Remembering your early D. Sc. (awarded by Sir Goronwy, MWE) I have faith in your abilities and you must have faith yourself that if you concentrate your energies on what your are really good at, it will bring its rewards. Gyda phob dymuniad da (with every good wish)." (The late Sir Goronwy Daniel, diplomat and sometime Principal of UCW Aberystwyth.)

16) "As you know, the Royal Society of Chemistry has nominated you for consideration to receive a Civil List Pension (awarded 2005). (Delroy Blake, 10 Downing Street, London, 27th Sept. 2004).

17) Evans has a strong research record ...we consider ourselves very lucky that he is able to visit the Theory Center at Cornell and contribute so significanty to our research program. He has discovered several new effects of non linear optics during his stay in forty four articles, and I have nominated him for a Packard Fellowship" (Prof. Malvin Kalos, Head of the Cornell Theory Center, early nineties)

18) "I have followed your career (as sometime Ramsay Memorial Fellow) with such interest and admiration." (Prof. Max McGlashan, University College London, 21st August 1987).

19) "Your computer simulation of rotation / translation coupling in chiral liquids is most important and significant" (the late Emeritus Prof. Stephen Mason, F.R.S., Prof. of Physics, King's College London, scientist and historian, 14th March 1983).

20) "I have talked to Prof. Noel Owen about you and he speaks very highly of you and your abilities" (Prof. J. Bevan Ott, Chair of Chemistry, Brigham Young University, August 7th 1987).

21) "You have an extremely impressive record, both as an undergraduate and since graduating" (Prof. A. F. Hegarty, Head of Chemistry University College Dublin, 1st Sept 1987).

22) "All the staff were agreed that you were extremely well suited to the Department in terms of personality and quality of work." (Prof. R. A. Stradling, F.R.S., Chair of Physics, St Andrews, 3th July 1984.)

23) "We would very much like to have a person of your quality and experience on our staff." (Prof. A. J. Carty, Chair of Chemistry, Univ. of Waterloo, Canada, Aug. 26th 1987.)

24) "..your research record is so strong that it would be a pleasure to look for support for you to study at Bradford should this be of interest to you." (Prof. A. F. Johnson, Chairman, Postgraduate School of Chemistry, University of Bradford, 21st Aug., 1987).

25) Your work in the spectroscopy and computer simulation of molecular dynamics is important and I learned of it on a visit to Britain (Edward Tenner of Princeton University Press, 9th April 1984, inviting a book.)

26) Opinion on my first monograph "Molecular Dynamics" (opus 108 on the Omnia Opera of http://www.aias.us/), was very positive, for example Prof. Sir John Rowlinson F.R.S. described it as "magnificent". This may have been partly out of politeness, but I think he did like it.

27) The late Prof. David Whiffen, F.R.S., sometime Director of the National Chemical Laboratory and Vice Chancellor in the University of Newcastle upon Tyne, greatly encouraged me when he mentioned to me that my work on molecular dynamics was the best since Debye. Anyway he liked it enough to offer me a post doctoral fellowship, an IBM (UK) Fellowship.

28) The opinion of my Ph. D. supervisor, the late Prof. Mansel Davies, was that my Ph. D. Thesis was one of the two best he had supervised. He mentioned to Dr Gareth Evans that he though I was the most gifted scientist he had met. He did not mention this to me directly, and he was a rigorously objective man, a humanist and sometime Fellow of Peterhouse, Cambridge. His objectivity was a profound influence on me and led to ECE theory, which is objective and Baconian. He also mentioned that the B(3) theory was worthy of a Nobel Prize in chemistry, and he was a Nobel Prize chemistry advisor. There is no reason to think he was biased in my favour.

29) In e mails received Feb. 2009, Prof. Larry Horwitz revealed that his group had begun work on a B(3) like entity published in "Foundations of Physics" in 1989, and that their work confirmed the theoretical prediction of B(3) albeit with a different approach. Their work was published also in the Physical Review and so this had established B(3) as mainline physics as early as 1992.

Overview

Einstein Cartan Evans (ECE) unified field theory is described in great detail on http://www.aias.us/ and http://www.atomicprecision.com/ and is the first generally covariant unified field theory that has been generally accepted. It covers areas of physics, chemistry, mathematics and engineering. It has entered its industrial stage through Steriwave Plc. ( http://www.steriwave.com/), which is the 51% owner of ECE Institute Ltd. A complete account of my research interests is given in some eight hundred papers and books, many of which are available in the Omnia Opera of http://www.aias.us/. The 126 source papers of ECE theory to date are given on this site, together with educational articles. ECE theory is available in five volumes to date of M. W. Evans, "Generally Covariant Unified Field Theory" (Abramis Academic, 2005 to present, five volumes published to date, the sixth volume in press). These volumes are available from Amazon, Arima and other bookshops. The two main websites of ECE theory are http://www.aias.us/ and http://www.atomicprecision.com/, which are intensely studied worldwide, generating about a quarter million hits per month from all science institutions of note worldwide. This level of interest makes the Alpha Institute for Advanced Study (AIAS) the world's leading institute of theoretical physics at present in terms of immediate current interest in its work. The ECE theory has replaced the standard model of physics and unifies the four fundamental fields of nature using Cartan geometry. ECE is a torsion based theory which for the first time correctly incorporates spacetime torsion into general relativity. It is generally accepted that the standard model of physics is obsolete and contains fundamental errors due to its arbitrary neglect of torsion. For example it can be shown ( http://www.aias.us/) that the Einstein field equation is incorrect because it violates the Cartan Evans dual identity. The symmetric connection of the standard model is incorrect because it relies on an arbitrary assertion that torsion is zero. Therefore there is no big bang, there are no black holes, no dark matter and in general any concept based on the Einstein field equation is erroneous. A new ECE cosmology has been developed to replace the incorrect standard cosmology. In the electrodynamic sector the ECE theory is based on the fundamental B(3) magnetic field of electrodynamics discovered by Evans at Cornell in 1992 and observed in the inverse Faraday effect. Many other major advances of ECE theory are described on http://www.aias.us/ , notably the unification of quantum mechanics and general relativty, the rejection of Copenhagen indeterminacy and so forth. These major advances have been recognized by two recent high honours of the British Government ( http://www.aias.us/).

The ECE theory has been developed from 2003 onwards in 126 source papers ( http://www.aias.us/) which are being published in the multi volume monograph by M. W. Evans, "Generally Covariant Unified Field Theory" (Abramis 2005 onwards). In addition many educational articles on ECE and several books appear on this http://www.aias.us/ website. The response to these articles has been monitored in great detail daily for almost five years, and shows intense interest in the theory from essentially all universities, institutes, corporations, government departments, military establishments and individual scholars worldwide. These feedback data are recorded in great detail on http://www.aias.us/. There is currently a deep schism in physics therefore between the ECE and Standard Schools of thought. The ECE School has developed its own method of publication, using quality controlled websites, monographs, and also papers refereed in the usual journals. The industrial phase of development of ECE theory has started with the formation of a company to develop and market new energy devices based on the theory. This company is ECE Institute Ltd., and is 51% owned by Steriwave Plc. This unprecedented and intense interest in ECE theory is recognized by the scientific and engineering readership worldwide, but as might be expected, the standard physics journals have been slow to join their fellow scientists in the acceptance of rational change. So it is important to study the http://www.aias.us/ website material in order to appreciate this change on thought in natural philosophy. In the reference section of this page there are references to ECE papers published in various ways, including the usual way of publication in refereed journals, and reference to fifteen papers which comprehensively refute some remarks by Hehl et al. which also appear on this Elsevier Scitopics page. The comprehensive refutation of the remarks by Hehl et al. are given in ECE Source papers cited below in the "further reading" section, namely: 89, 90, 93, 95, 96, 99, 100, 101, 102, 104, 109, 112, 118, 120 and 122 all available on http://www.aias.us/ and in M. W. Evans, "Generally Covariant Unified Field Theory", (Abramis 2009) volumes 5 and 6. These papers do not appear in the Elsevier search engine that brings up the papers by Hehl et al. on this Scitopics page, so I am redressing the balance here. These refutation papers prove the Cartan Evans dual identity in all detail, and also show, using computer algebra, the irretrievable flaws in the standard model. It is not therefore in the interest of standard modellers to allow open discussion, a lamentable state of affairs in physics. By feedback software to http://www.aias.us/ and http://www.atomicprecision.com/ we see that there is unprecedented, indeed overwhelming, interest in ECE theory. If one relied on citations, one would think that was no interest, so the citation system is meaningless when it comes to really new advances in physics because these advances are not allowed into print in standard journals. If this happens, citations are effectively censored. We use computer algebra which Hehl et al. could not bring to bear, and give several rigorous proofs of the Einstein Cartan dual identity which the Einstein field equation does not obey. Others of the 126 source ECE papers now available develop a comprehensive unified field theory and a torsion based cosmology. Big bang and black hole theory are comprehensively refuted by several authors in several independent ways, notably in ECE paper 120 by Evans, Eckardt, Crothers and Dunning-Davies. The original refutation of Hehl et al., paper 89, has been accepted essentially unanimously by the scientific community worldwide, I have received no statement of support for Hehl, who used his infuence as Annalen editor to block a paper of mine, and used his influence with the editor of "Foundations of Physics", G. 't Hooft, to block any reply of mine in that journal. It is well known that the founding editor of "Foundations of Physics", Alwyn van der Merwe, was removed after publishing papers on ECE theory. So I decided not to recognize 't Hooft and to publish my detailed refutations of Hehl et al. elsewhere. These refutations have been overwhelmingly accepted. We know this by the continuing, unprecedented interest in ECE theory indicated by site feedback software. We now see ECE theory appearing in invited journal issues edited by unbiased colleagues. Courses on Cartan's differential geometry have remained unchanged, meaning that the incorrect views of Rodrigues and Hehl (visible on this page) have been rejected by the international mathematical community. By allowing incorrect views into print, 't Hooft's editorship of "Foundations of Physics" has been shown to be biased. The interest in ECE theory continues to grow as it goes into its industrial phase.

Detailed proofs of fundamental concepts in differential geometry such as the tetrad postulate are found throughout the ECE source papers on http://www.aias.us/. These are proofs expected of any student in differential geometry, which is not a difficult subject. Various proofs of the Cartan Bianchi identity are found from paper 15 onwards (referenced below). The Cartan Bianchi identity is also a standard feature of differential geometry and students are expected to be able to prove it in a textbook such as S. P. Carroll, "Spacetime and Geometry: an Introduction to General Relativity" (Addison Wesley 2004). In paper 88 for example it is shown that the so called first and second Bianchi identities of the standard model are restricted by the arbitrary assumption of zero torsion. In paper 99, the fundamental origin of torsion is proven from the action of the commutator of covariant derivatives on the four vector. Whenever curvature appears in differential geometry, so does torsion, and the latter cannot be arbitrarily neglected. The fundamental origin of the Cartan Bianchi identity is discussed in paper 102, where it is proven that the identity is a cyclic sum of three curvature tensors identically equal to a cyclic sum of definitions of the same three curvature tensors (eq. (20) of this paper). This proof is self checking and originates in the proof given in paper 99. The Cartan Bianchi identity is therefore a true identity, whereas the so called first and second Bianchi identities of the standard model incorrectly omit torsion. This leads to a disaster for standard gravitational physics. The Hodge dual of the Cartan Bianchi identity is developed in eqs. (35) ff. of paper 102 referenced below. It is well known that the Hodge dual of a differential two-form in four-dimensions is another differential two-form. It follows that the Hodge dual of the commutator of covariant derivatives is another commutator of covariant derivatives. The latter acts on the four vector to produce curvature and torsion tensors which are related by the dual of the Cartan Bianchi identity. This is known as the Cartan Evans dual identity, one of the basic advances made in differential geometry by ECE theory. The dual identity is again a rigorous identity which states that the cyclic sum of Hodge duals of three curvature tensors is identically equal to the same cyclic sum of definitions of the Hodge duals of these three tensors. This result is expressed in the notation of differential geometry in eq. (42) of paper 102 referenced and linked below. Paper 104 further develops the proof of the Cartan Evans dual identity, and gives it in its simplest form as eq. (15) of paper 104. In this tensor form the Cartan Evans dual identity states that the covariant derivative of the torsion tensor is a well defined curvature tensor. In tensor form the original Cartan Bianchi identity states that the covariant derivative of the Hodge dual of the torsion tensor is a well defined Hodge dual curvature tensor. Papers 109 and 112, referenced and cross linked below, further develop these rigorous proofs. For example section 2 of paper 112 is a short review of the form and tensorial representations of the Cartan Bianchi identity. It is emphasized that this kind of proof is expected of a student of standard differential geometry taught at present in standard courses in mathematics. The ECE papers give the proofs in all detail. The rigorous nature of the Cartan Evans dual identity is most clearly evident in eq. (62) of paper 112 refernced and linked below. On the left hand side is a cyclic sum of three Hodge dual curvature tensors, on the right hand side papers the cyclic sum of the definitions of these same tensors.

The dual identity spells the end of the Einsteinian era in gravitational physics because of Einstein's neglect of torsion in his field equation. In consequence, it is shown using computer algebra in papers such as 93, 95 and 120 referenced and linked below that every known solution of the Einstein field equation in the presence of matter violates basic geometry - the dual identity. The vacuum solutions are Ricci flat solutions which are merely mathematical idealizations with no meaning in physics. This is discussed in various articles by Crothers referenced and linked below. Torsion cannot be neglected in differential geometry, and the ECE field equations place torsion at the centre of natural philosophy. This produces in turn the ECE engineering model referenced and linked below, and so produces the industrial phase of ECE theory through companies such as Steriwave Plc. ( http://www.aias.us/).

In view of these rigorous proofs that any student should be able to grasp, the "papers" by Rodrigues et al. and by Hehl et al. are well known by now to be at best incorrect, and at worst a deliberate attempt to misrepresent differential geometry itself. Deliberate mispresentation is illegal under Acts such as The Prevention of Harassment Act of 1997 in England and Wales and many other Statutes of various countries.

The failed standard cosmology has been replaced by an ECE cosmology based on spacetime torsion as being of central importance. The ECE papers to date on cosmology are cited below in the "further reading" section and are the following ECE source papers on http://www.aias.us/ and http://www.atomicprecision.com/: 49, 56, 64, 76, 77, 91, 93, 95, 100, 106, 108, 111, 112, 114, 117, 118, 119, 120, 123, 125 and 126. These papers refute big bang, black hole theory and dark matter theory and give new explanations for cosmology without using the Einstein field equation. All solutions of the latter in the presence of matter violate the Cartan Evans dual identity and are mathematically incorrect. The "vacuum solutions" of the Einstein equation are merely constructs of mathematical interest only and have been severely criticised by Crothers (see the "further reading" section below). No physics can be gleaned from incorrect mathematics. New torsion based explanations are given for the cosmological red shift, the gravitational red shift, relativistic orbits (the relativistic Kepler problem), the orbits of binary pulsars, the orbits and velocity curves of whirlpool galaxies, the earth's gravitomagnetic precession, the Thomas precession, the equinoctial precession, and cosmological initial events. The astronomical data are described to high precision by the orbital theorem of ECE source paper 111. The ECE equations of motion are based on the Cartan Bianchi identity (homogeneous equations) and the Cartan Evans dual identity (inhomogeneous equations). All planar orbits, including those of galaxies, are described by conservation of spacetime angular momentum as in papers 123 and 126 without the use of "dark matter", a non-Baconian and ad hoc construct of standard physics. These are major and internationally accepted advances in cosmology.

The ECE development of most interest industrially is spin connection resonance (SRC), which is based on the fact that the appearance of the spin connection in the field equations of ECE theory give an Euler Bernoulli resonance structure without violation of any conservation law of physics. The ECE papers that deal with spin connection resonance are the following ECE source papers on http://www.aias.us/: 52, 53, 59, 60, 63, 64, 65, 68, 74, 87, 92, 94, 100 and 107. These are referenced and linked below in the "further reading" section. These papers apply the idea of SCR to the H atom, atoms and molecules, counter gravitation, magnetic motors, the Bedini device and the Faraday disk generator. Patents based on this work are being drawn up and will be or have been applied for in the ECE Institute Ltd. company 51% owned by Steriwave Plc. ( http://www.steriwave.com/). Work on these devices is taking place at the company's research and development laboratories in Croydon, and we have also been allocated space in Unit 11 of the Aberystwyth Science Park for this and other ECE work. These devices have essentially no carbon footrpint and produce no harmful emissions. They take electric power from the spinning of spacetime (the spacetime torsion). From daily monitoring of the feedback activity generated by http://www.aias.us/ it is seen that paper 94 has been intensely studied by many institutes, corporations, military facilities, and hundreds of thousands of individuals since it was posted over a year ago. ECE is also of use in the area of counter gravitation, in which SCR is also a key component. Therefore http://www.aias.us/ is routinely studied by essentially all the major aerospace, computer and power corporations. There is nothing like this available in the obsolete standard model, which neglects spacetime torsion arbitrarily. This arbitrary neglect of torsion is what leads to a catastrophic violation of the Cartan Evans dual identity and to an equally catastrophic failure of the Einstein field equation.

The main areas of natural philosophy have been covered in the following ECE source papers on http://www.aias.us/, referenced at the end of in the further reading section below from paper 1 onwards. The following are the ECE source papers that are most relevant in this context: 1-4, 7, 13, 15 - 21, 27, 35, 38, 39, 44 - 47, 50, 55, 67, 71, 72, 83, 85, 88 and 99, reviewed in papers 50 and 100 on http://www.aias.us/. They cover topics such as the field and wave equations of ECE, their reduction to all the main equations of natural philosophy, the unification of quantum mechanics and general relativity by deriving the Dirac equation from the tetrad postulate, the rejection of indeterminacy and the generally covariant Heisenberg equation, comprehensive details of geometry with many detailed proofs, the reduction of ECE theory to higher topology electrodynamics such as O(3) electrodynamics, ECE theories of radiative corrections, electroweak and strong fields, neutrino oscillations, Aharonov Bohm effects, the origin of spin, the Planck constant and Pauli exclusion principle, the replacement of dark matter theory, Sagnac efect, Faraday disk generator, Faraday effect, inverse Faraday effect, dielectrics, the effect of gravitation on the polarization of light, and on the Sagnac effect, radiatively induced fermion resonance (RFR), development of the equations of generally covariant dynamics and electrodynamics, the replacement of gauge theory with a principle based on the general invariance of the tetrad postulate, ECE theory of the Lamb shift and standard criticism of quantum electrodynamics, the development of the rigorous Bianchi identity, and various advances in the mathematics of differential geometry. These are in addition to the topics covered aleady on this page.

The precursor theory of ECE is given in detail in source papers in the Omnia Opera section of http://www.aias.us/ from 1992 onwards to 2003. There are hyperlinks on the http://www.aias.us/ site to my original papers back to 1973, scientific papers which can therefore be read in detail by the interested reader. The main precursor theory is O(3) electrodynamics, which is based on the discovery of the B(3) field reported in Physica B in 1992. These original Physica B papers can be found in the Omnia Opera section of http://www.aias.us/. The B(3) field is the fundamental magnetic flux density of the electromagnetic field or photon. It does not appear in the Maxwell Heaviside (MH) field theory as taught in the current standard dogma, because that dogma restricts solutions of MH to transverse. There is nothing in the original MH theory however to prohibit longitudinal solutions. I gradually developed an electrodynamics based on gauge theory, and this is known as O(3) electrodynamics. It is similar to theories developed independently by Barrett, Harmuth and coworkers, and Lehnert and coworkers. These higher topology electrodynamics considerably increase the scope of the MH theory and have been thoroughly debated in the literature from 1992 onwards. They are therefore firmly accepted internationally as theories of electrodynamics not constrained by the often incorrect dogma of the standard model. The latter is a U(1) gauge theory as is well known. An example is the inverse Faraday effect, which is the magnetization of matter by a circularly or elliptically polarized electromagnetic field. In the standard dogma this is explained with a conjugate product without the B(3) field in an ad hoc extension of special relativity. In the O(3) electrodynamics it is explained with the B(3) field and O(3) gauge electrodynamics. In ECE theory it is explained with the spin connection of spacetime in a rigorously covariant manner as requried by relativity and the need for a unified field theory. In papers and monographs from 1992 to 2003, O(3) electrodynamics was extensively developed and applied to many areas of electrodynamics and non-linear optics. It has been recognized that O(3) electrodynamics is homomorphic with Barrett, Harmuth and Lehnert electrodynamics, and also with some other theories as reviews for example in volume 119 of "Advances in Chemical Physics", published in three parts in 2001, consisting of thirty five review articles.

My other areas of interest are recorded in great detail in the Omnia Opera section of http://www.aias.us/, with hyperlinks to source papers gong back to 1973. Numerous honours, awards, nominations, competitive fellowships, prizes and medals are recorded on that site and in many volumes of reference vehicles such as Marquis Who's Who and Burke's Peerage and Gentry.

Formal CV

Prof. Myron Wyn Evans, B. Sc., Ph. D., D. Sc. of Glyneithrym

Many editions of "Marquis Who's Who" in America, World and Science and Engineering, 1998 to present, "Burke's Peerage and Gentry" (2009, 107th edition). Several other reference vehicles.

British Civil List Pensioner in Science, President of AIAS, Director of Steriwave Plc., ECE Institute Ltd., and TGA. Junior Research Fellow Wolfson College Oxford.

Armiger and Rank of Gentleman July 8th. 2008.

Arms ( http://www.aias.us/): Per fesse dancetty acute Gules and Sable a Lion rampant Or holding between the forepaws a Garb of hay Argent banded Vert a Bordure engrailed Or.

Crest: Upon a helm with a Wreath Or Gules and Sable two Dragons rampant repectant Gules holding between them a representative of the Celtic cross at Nevern sans pedestal Sable fimbriated Vert, Mantled Sable and Gule lined Or.

Motto: POER Y LLWCH O'R PAIR LLACHAR

Badge: A Norman helm affronty or quadrinimbed Sable and charged with two Gouttes in fess Azure.

Qualifications: University College of Wales Aberystwyth: B. Sc. (suma cum laude, 1971); Ph. D. 1974; D. Sc. 1977 (youngest recipient of the D. Sc. degree in Britain and the Commonwealth).

National Honours and Nominations: Appointed by the Crown, Prime Minister and Parliament as Civil List Pensioner in 2005 in recognition of distinguished service to Great Britain and the Commonwealth in science. Nominated for this appointment by the Royal Society of Chemistry (2004) and Royal Society. Armiger 2008 with rank of Gentleman in recognition of distinguished service to international science and the community. Several nominations for national honours such as knighthood, O.M. and C.H. Several nominations Packard Fellowship, Wolf Prize, Faisal Prize and other major prizes.

Honours and Awards: Numerous honours, prizes, medals and awards, selected in chronological order as follows. Pontardawe Grammar School Prize for best O level results 1966; School Prefect 1966. UCW Aberystwyth Mathews Prize for best first year student 1969. UCW Aberystwyth Dr Samuel Williams graduate studentship 1971. Harrison Memorial Prize fo the Royal Society of Chemistry 1978. Meldola Medal of the Royal Society of Chemistry 1979. Honorary Fellow University of London and University of Lancaster 1988. Sigma Pi Sigma American Institute of Physics 1995. TGA Gold Medal 2008. Numerous other medals, honours and awards.

Competitive Post Doctoral Fellowships.

Science Research Council Fellowship 1974. National Research Council of Canada Fellowship 1974. Imperial Chemical Industries Fellowship 1974. Junior Research Fellowship of Wolfson College Oxford 1975. Ramsay Memorial Fellowship 1976. Science and Engineering Council Advanced Fellowship 1978. University of Wales Fellowship Bangor 1983. University of Wales Fellowship Swansea 1983. University of Wales Pilcher Senior Fellowhsip Swansea 1985. British IBM Fellowship 1985. Leverhulme Trust Fellowship 1985. Humboldt Fellowship 1985. Leverhulme Trust Fellowship 1992.

Visitng Academic Appointments

Trinity College Dublin 1986. Visiting Professor IBM Kingston New York, 1986 - 1988. Cornell Theory Center 1988 - 1992. University of Zurich 1990 - 1991. Penn State 1991. York Univeristy Toronto 1995. Indian Statistical Institute 1995.

Main Posts

1971 - 1974: Ph. D. student of Prof. Mansel Davies at the Edward Davies Chemical Laboratories, University College of Wales, Aberystwyth.

1974 - 1976: SRC Fellow in the Physical Chemistry Laboratory Oxford with Prof. Sir John Rowlinson FRS.

1975: Elected JRF Wolfson College Oxford.

1976 - 1978: British Ramsay Memorial Fellow, Edward Davies Chemical Laboratories, UCW Aberystwyth.

1978: Lecturer in Chemistry UCW Swansea.

1978 - 1983 SERC Advanced Fellow at the EDCL.

1983 - 1985: Univeristy of Wales Fellow Bangor.

1985 - 1986: University of Wales Pilcher Senior Fellow Swansea.

1986 - 1988: IBM Visiting Professor and Project Leader, Clementi Environment, Kingston, New York , USA.

1988 - 1992 : Visiting Scientist Cornell Theory Center.

1990 - 1991 : Guest of the University of Zurich.

1992 - 1995 : Professor of Physics University of North Carolina Charlotte.

1995 - 2007 : Director of the Alpha Institute for Advanced Study ( http://www.aias.us/).

2007 - present : President of AIAS.

2007 - present : Director of Steriwave Plc.

2008 - present: Director of ECE Institute Ltd. and TGA.

2008 - present: President of the Myron Evans University.

Brief Overview of Research Work

Over eight hundred publications in chemistry, physics, differential geometry and electrical engineering ( http://www.aias.us/ Omnia Opera). First generally accepted explanation of the far infra red in terms of molecular dynamics and computer smulation. Pioneer of computer simulation and animation. Pioneer and coordinator of multi technical research across Europe within the European Molecular Liquids Group founded at the National Physical Laboratory in 1980. Pioneer of computer simulation in the presence of applied fields with applications to non-linear optics and magnetless fermion resonance techniques. Discovery (1992) of the generally covariant B(3) field of electrodynamics and quantum electrodynamics. Development (1992 to 2003) of higher symmetry gauge theories of electrodynamics culminating in the development of ECE theory 2003 to present.

Short Selection of Books

Over fifty books, the most influential are as follows. "Molecular Dynamics" (Wiley 1982). "Molecular Diffusion" (Wiley 1984). Several special topical issues of Wiley's "Advances in Chemcial Physics", notably volumes 62, 63, 81, 85(1) to 85(3), and 119(1) to 119(3). "The Enigmatic Photon" in five volumes (1994 to 2002 with Jean-Pierre Vigier). "Classial and Quantum Electrodynamics and the B(3) Field" (World Scientific 2001); Multi volume "Generally Covariant Unified Field theory" (Abramis 2005 to present).

Websites

The http://www.aias.us/ website was started in about 2002 and is currently among the most studied site in science. It contains about fifteen hundred documents and attracts about a quarter million hits every month together with its sister website http://www.atomicprecision.com/. The feedback activity of these sites has been monitored daily in all detail for about five years, showing overwhelming and highest quality international interest in ECE theory.

Poetry, Biography and Films

One book of poetry: "Autobiography - Sonnets" (Arima 2005 and http://www.aias.us/). Biography by Kerry Pendergast (reference two below). "The Universe of Myron Evans (Directed by Franceso Fucilla 2008); "The Life of Myron Evans" (to be Directed by Ken Russell 2009).

Selected links

Comments

Comment by David Frazier 10 February 2009 21:51

I fail to see how ECE even qualifies for acceptance by this site, which supposedly offers reliable scientific information. It has been shown, again and again, that the entire ECE theory is based upon a fundamental error in the manipulation of differential geometry. Secondly, Dr Evans makes legal threats against those who persistently expose that mathematical error. This alone should disbar Dr Evans from participation in any open-minded scientific forum. Thirdly, Evans' pressure-group (Alpha Institute for Advanced Studies), and similar groups run by a Dr Santilli, have a habit of setting-up unaccredited 'universities', appointing each other professorships in those universities and rewarding each other with gold medals. Civil dignatories and local politicians are invited to the award ceremonies, and the overall strategy seems to be to fool powerful laymen into thinking that they are dealing with a proper academic society. However, to any scientist, the incorrectness of ECE is quite clear from the fact that it leads to the prediction of 'perpetual motion'. Rather than therefore questioning his theory, however, Evans then goes in the other direction and praises well-known 'free-energy' inventors hailing from the lunatic fringe - as well as planning to produce his own perpetual motion machines. Inclusion of ECE theory, which is demonstrably wrong rather than being merely 'alternative' in approach, can only undermine respect for the present site. It would be particularly ironic if SciTopics were seen to take seriously a concept which has even been largely shunned by the notoriously unreliable Wikipedia.
Comment by Waldyr Rodrigues 11 February 2009 20:53

Is ECE a consistent theory? Can you trust the Mathematics and Physics used by AIAS, e.g., as their statement that there exists a "dual of the first Bianchi identity"? To know the answer, please take a look at the papers: 1. A. L. Trovon de Carvalho and Waldyr A. Rodrigues Jr., The non Sequitur Mathematics and Physics of the ?New Electrodynamics? Proposed by the AIAS Group, Random Oper. Stoch. Equs. 9 (3), 161-206 (2001). MR 2002d:78002 , http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0302016 2. Waldyr A. Rodrigues Jr and Quintino A. G. de Souza, An Ambiguous Statement Called "Tetrad Postulate" and the Correct Field Equations Satisfied by the Tetrad Fields, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 14(12), 2095-2150 (2005), MR 2007a:83003 http://arxiv.org/abs/math-ph/0411085 3. Waldyr A. Rodrigues Jr., Differential Forms on Riemannian (Lorentzian) and Riemann-Cartan Structures and Some Applications to Physics, Ann. Fond. L. de Broglie 32 (4), 425-478 (2007). http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0712/0712.3067v3.pdf
Comment by Myron Wyn Evans 12 February 2009 14:39

The comment by Frazier is from an admitted pseudoscientist, and is wholly inaccurate rant. The ECE theory is based directly on Cartan geometry and has been proven rigorously with self checking proofs. The theory does not lead to violation of conservtaion of energy. In consequence Frazier has been blocked from further participation in this forum. Rodrigues is well known to contrive pseudo-mathematics in his own journals and has a long history of attacking ECE theory simply because I use Cartan geometry. He has no credibility and has been blocked from this forum, according to whose rules only commenst that I approve of are allowed.
Comment by David Frazier 12 February 2009 15:46

I think that Evans has rather condemned himself out of his own mouth. It would be difficult to find anyone more anti-pseudoscience than myself. Moreover, his 'blog' of today shows him to be paranoid and malicious. I believe that SciTopics is run by Elsevier. I shall therefore be taking the matter of censorship up with them.
Comment by Gareth Evans 16 February 2009 14:17

We understand your position in this Bas and your suggestion of open debate is reasonable. I follow very closely, however, the debate on global warming / climate change on various internet sites, and one thing the internet has provided is a voice for those who do not understand the science and issues involved. These people are sometimes biased to the point where their views, as incorrect as they may be, cannot be influenced with the best arguments, intent, and reasoning. This is something we are quickly learning to live with in this new age of information sharing and addictive weblogs. The same is true unfortunately with ECE theory. You may be surprised to learn that there does not seem to be a lot of opposition to the theory. The opposition that does exist tends to be confined to a very small handful of individuals whose understanding of the physics, often by their own admissions, is not good and is certainly not complete. Professor Myron Evans has always been more than happy to respond to any comments and criticisms when well founded and intended. There is no question, however, about the accuracy and huge significance of ECE theory. It is the first theory to unify all of physics and it successfully reproduces all the laws and all the well known experimental results of physics. It explains some experiments that cannot be explained using standard theories (as taught in our schools and universities) successfully for the first time. It provides the interlinks between the different fields of physics bringing it all together consistently and succinctly for the first time. Those who do not believe or understand the theory need to explain how all of this is possible. How can one bogus or incorrect theory (as they suggest it is) possibly correctly explain all of known physics? Is it possible to invent a theory (that is incorrect) that does all of this? Is it possible to "fix" all the confirmations and proofs, that cover all the fields of physics remember, with one mathematical set of equations? How can the objectors possibly ignore the success of ECE theory - there is not a single result in any field of physics, that has so far been tested, where it has failed to reproduce observation - and this is what physics is about (observations, experiments, and reproducing them with our theories). This is a remarkable result for a single theory Bas. This is the dream accomplished of the very best scientists past and present. ECE theory is based, for the first time, on a correct geometry. This, and other more technical reasons that the lay reader would not understand, is why it works. Einstein failed because he chose the wrong geometry and much of what followed from his work is flawed because of this (to the point where unphysical and meaningless results and concepts have appeared - all well discussed on the AIAS website). So yes Bas, do encourage debate providing you realise that there does come a point when you have to accept that some individuals, for whatever reasons, are not going to admit they are wrong even when they can offer no other explanations as to why this theory works. It will be interesting to see how the debate runs but it will frustrate and irritate Professor Myron Evans at times, just as the "debate" on global warming / climate change frustrates those who understand the issues best (such as James Hansen at NASA). As I say, the same sort of situation exists in climate science (where we cannot afford to be wrong). These internet science blogs unfortunately give an unfair voice to pseudo-scientists, those who are incorrect, or those who just like hearing the sound of their own voices. Unfortunately, there comes a point when they have to be turned off. I am copying this response to James Hansen because good science, in many fields, is now being influenced and affected by web based "debates" and "opinions" and the views of poor or non-scientists with sometimes questionable motives. This is an issue of growing concern when the accuracy of our science, and getting the messages across, is probably more important than at any time in our history. Gareth John Evans
Comment by Friedrich Hehl 16 February 2009 21:39

The ECE-theory of Myrone Evans has been critically evaluated in the following three refereed papers: 1) Friedrich W. Hehl, An Assessment of Evans' unified field theory. I, Foundations of Physics 38 (2008) 7-37, see also http://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0703116 , 2) Friedrich W. Hehl and Yuri N. Obukhov, An Assessment of Evans' unified field theory. II, Foundations of Physics 38 (2008) 38-46, see also http://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0703117 , 3) Gerhard W. Bruhn, Friedrich W. Hehl, Arkadiusz Jadczyk, Comments on "Spin Connection Resonance in Gravitational General Relativity", Acta Physica Polonica B 39 (2008), 51-58, see also http://arxiv.org/pdf/arXiv:0707.4433 . I quote from the abstract of the first paper: "... we show that Evans' ansatz for electromagnetism is untenable beyond repair both from a geometrical as well as from a physical point of view. As a consequence, his unified theory is obsolete." Friedrich W. Hehl Univ. of Cologne and Univ. of Missouri-Columbia, 16 Feb. 2009
Comment by Norman Page 19 February 2009 16:30

As Dr Evans knows only too well it is very difficult for unorthodox views to get a hearing in the standard peer reviewed Journals.Therefore sites such as this and the internet in general provide a valuable forum for the presentation and discussion of more heterodox theories and opinions. I would suggest that it is much better that all comments be presented and that no comments or commentators are blocked. Intemperate attacks and language actually rebound against those using them rather than damaging the one attacked. Gareth Evans seems to suggest that limiting comments is of value in some instances but his example proves the exact opposite since in this case it is his chosen "authority " Hansen whose science is exremely dubious since the earth is clearly cooling rather than warming- and the conventional wisdom is leading politicians into exactly the wrong policies. Let all the flowers blossom - science has nothing to fear from open and vigorous debate. Any censorship of ideas should be anathema to a true scientist.
Comment by Gerhard W. Bruhn 24 February 2009 04:09

Which kind of unorthodox views are under consideration here with respect to ECE theory? -- If one models reality by (mathematical) laws of physics then, as can be seen from history of science, those models may be more or less adeqate to nature, and therefore the resulting theories may yield different and contradicting statements in certain domains of reality. Let me recall the main theories: Quantum theory / General relativity. And unorthodox views of today may be the theories of tomorrow. -- However, that's NOT the kind of objections which can be found against ECE theory since several years e.g. on my website http://www2.mathematik.tu-darmstadt.de/~bruhn/GCUFT.html . -- Dr. Evans is using the tools of mathematics. And this way of using mathematics is the main point of criticisms. You cannot really debate on whether "1 plus 1 = 3" is true. That is simply wrong. But the consequences of "1 plus 1 = 3" are 'wonderful'. What was and is criticized on ECE theory is of that kind: Violations of the rules of mathematics with absurd consequences. No miracle, if one feels not tied to those rules and creates his own "new math" then one will get "miraculous" results which cannot be achieved by conventional mathematics. -- And there is another point in addition: Dr. Evans usually replies to mathematical objections not by arguments (or at most by fallacies), but by ad hominem insults of his critics. In serious cases (as e.g. in mine) he blocks all contacts and offers for debate. That's not the way to get reputation within the scientific community. That's the reason why Dr. Evans' results are ignored by the physical community. Gerhard W. Bruhn, Dep. of Mathematics, Darmstadt University of Technology
Comment by Gerhard W. Bruhn 24 February 2009 11:17

As to Dr. Evans' recent proposal on his blog http://www.atomicprecision.com/blog/2009/02/23/fwd-a-qualifying-quiz-for-critics/ -- What he is asking for in 1) and 2) was developed by Elie Cartan (1869-1951) in the twenties of the last century and is textbook folklore now. -- 1) The Cartan structure equations. -- 2) The Cartan Bianchi identity. More: Also the second Bianchi identity D^R sup a sub b = 0 in the PRESENCE OF TORSION which is denied by Dr. Evans now and replaced with a "true second Bianchi identity". The latter is only a trivial implication of the first (or the second) Bianchi identity. http://www2.mathematik.tu-darmstadt.de/~bruhn/onBianchisId180209.pdf -- ad 3) The Cartan Evans dual identity is wrong as can be seen by many counter examples. -- ad 4) the ECE wave equation is an implication of the "Evans Lemma of differential geometry" which is wrong as well due to elementary math flaws. See http://www2.mathematik.tu-darmstadt.de/~bruhn/OnECElemma180209.pdf -- ad 5) To imagine which kind conclusions could be drawn from a thoroughly wrong "theory" can be left to the readers.-- Gerhard W. Bruhn, Dep. of Mathematics, Darmstadt University of Technology
Comment by Gerhard W. Bruhn 24 February 2009 16:11

As if working on demand Dr. Evans confirms the TRIVIALITY of his flaws. On his blog http://www.atomicprecision.com/blog/2009/02/24/fwd-further-misrepresentation-by-rodrigues-and-bruhn/ . . . . . . . we read: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . "... It is claimed that the anti-symmetry of the torsion tensor in its lower two indices somehow does not imply the antisymmetry of the gamma connection in the same two indices. ... Obscure nonsense is contrived as usual. Rodrigues is now clearly implied in fraud because he is the co-author of this nonsense. By definition: . . . . T sup kappa sub mu nu = gamma sup kappa sub mu nu - gamma sup kappa nu mu and is antisymmetric in the lower two indices mu and nu ... QED." . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . But this was NOT THE CLAIM. Evans' claim was: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . T sup kappa sub mu nu ANTIsymmetric in mu,nu => . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Gamma sup kappa sub mu nu ANTIsymmetric in mu,nu . . . . . . . . . . . . And this implication is WRONG. A correct conclusion would be: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . T sup kappa sub mu nu antisymmetric in mu,nu and NOT VANISHING => . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Gamma sup kappa sub mu nu ASYMMETRIC in mu,nu . . . . However, one cannot mix up ANTI-symmetric with A-symmetric (= NON-symmetric) as Dr. Evans apparently does. Therefore, pointing to such a mix up is not a "misrepresentation" but a completely justified hint to the author. Since the author Dr. Evans is believing to have refuted by his "conclusion" one century of mathematical physics. WHAT A GRAND DELUSION ! . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Gerhard W. Bruhn, Dep. of Mathematics, Darmstadt University of Technology
Comment by Dave Feustel 24 February 2009 19:06

The comments by Bruhn/Wehl/etc are noise. Why bother with this webside which bars postings by Evans but authorises erroneous postings by people who seem incapable of reasoning correctly. I'm sticking to the AIAS.us webpage where the troublemakers mentioned above have no presence.
Comment by Gerhard W. Bruhn 25 February 2009 17:31

As visible on the Evans blog "Refutation of Bruhn" -- http://www.atomicprecision.com/blog/2009/02/24/fwd-refutation-of-bruhn/ . . . . and from his recent web note "Refutation of Bruhn SciPost Posting" . . . . http://www.atomicprecision.com/blog/wp-filez/adefinitiverefutation1.pdf . . . . where he once more writes: ... (upper index lambda suppressed) . . . . T sub mu nu = - T sub nu mu . . . . . . . AND SO . . . . Gamma sub mu nu = - Gamma sub nu mu . . . . . Apparently Dr. Evans does not grasp it. He should think about his "AND SO". As help I posted a diagram at . . . . http://www2.mathematik.tu-darmstadt.de/~bruhn/ConnectionTorsion.JPG . . . . showing an A-symmetric connection Gamma yielding an ANTI-symmetric torsion. Hence the antisymmetry of torsion does NOT IMPLY the antisymmetry of connection. -- And vanishing torsion is possible if and only if the connection is symmetric. The given example can readily be extended to higher dimensions. -- Dr. Evans refers to the ''antisymmetry of the commutator''. The commutator can be found in S.M. Carroll's Lecture Notes on GR, p.75, Eq. (3.66). It evidently contains only the torsion coefficients T explicitly, i.e. the connection appears only in the form of double of its antisymmetric part, see Carroll: L.N. Eq.(3.16). Hence only the antisymmetric p a r t of Gamma, but not the Gammas themselves are tied by the commutator equation. See the 2-D example . . . . http://www2.mathematik.tu-darmstadt.de/~bruhn/ConnectionTorsion.JPG . . . . . . Gerhard W. Bruhn, Dep. of Mathematics, Darmstadt University of Technology
Comment by Gerhard W. Bruhn 26 February 2009 08:05

Hopeless! He will never grasp it: Dr. Evans on his blog http://www.atomicprecision.com/blog/2009/02/25/fwd-definitive-refutation-of-bruhn/ issueing another "Definitive Refutation of Bruhn", a document of total confusion: "The commutator is antisymmetric, the connection is antisymmetric." . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Once again: The torsion is antisymmetric by definition, but this does NOT IMPLY the antisymmetry of the connection. See the counter example at . . . . . . . . http://www2.mathematik.tu-darmstadt.de/~bruhn/ConnectionTorsion.JPG
Comment by Gareth Evans 26 February 2009 12:52

The comments of Bruhn, Hehl, and Rodriguez above have already been refuted in detail on the AIAS website - www.aias.us . The gravitational sector of the standard model of physics, the one they seek to defend, has been shown to be obsolete in many ways with the situation fully outlined in papers 93, 118, 120 and 122 in the ECE theory of papers on www.aias.us. Quoting Myron Evans: ?The easiest way to see that the gravitational sector is WRONG is paper 122 of the ECE theory series on the AIAS website, in which an anti-symmetric commutator acts on four vector to produce a negative term, the antisymmetric torsion multiplied by the covariant derivative of a four vector, plus the Riemann tensor multiplied by the four vector. This is actually Riemann geometry which could have been done in the nineteenth century. The antisymmetric torsion is the difference of two antisymmetric connections. The indices of the commutator are mu and nu, and these same indices occur as the lower two indices of the connection. So if the connection is symmetric, the commutator vanishes. This means that it becomes the null operator acting on a four vector. This produces zero torsion and zero curvature, and the gravitational field vanishes - making the standard model obsolete. It has been replaced by the generally accepted ECE theory where the torsion is properly considered. In the standard model the torsion generated by the commutator was incorrectly omitted, so there were no constraints on the symmetry of the connection. The latter was incorrectly asserted to be symmetric for ease of calculation, a symmetric connection allows an analytical relation between it and the symmetric metric. If we try to use such a symmetric connection in the Cartan Evans dual identity, the identity is not obeyed (papers 93, 95, and 120). In a nutshell, a commutator is always anti-symmetric, it has no symmetric part. This means that the connection is always anti-symmetric, it has no symmetric part. This is a catastrophe for standard gravitational physics and means that the whole subject must be revised. We have actually done a lot of this already in the past few months (see the main part of the ECE Sci Topics site and this site)?. Professor Myron Evans, at this time, is not allowed to post these scientific comments on this ECE, Sci Topics site himself. Whether or not this is deliberate censorship it is not clear but the comments section of this site is now effectively commandeered by a very small group of individuals who are allowed to post their inaccurate "objections". This even though the interest in the objections raised by Bruhn, a main voice in this small group, from the scientific community at large can be monitored and seems to be largely insignificant. Below is a comparative impact table showing the average number of visits to the AIAS websites each month. The AIAS websites receive over a quarter of a million hits a month on average (not including a recent 75% ?spike? in interest since this SciTopics site was launched). Bruhn?s website, dedicated to finding even the smallest mathematical flaws in ECE theory (he seems to have little interest in the physics) receives on average around 10 visits a month. No doubt Dr Bruhn will correct us if this level of interest is understated and / or if interest in his views has also "spiked" recently. It is incomprehensible and indefensible that such a small group of objectors, with inaccurate views that are seemingly largely ignored by their peers, are now being allowed to so disproportionately influence such an important development in science on this website. ECE theory reduces to all the well known laws of physics - so every known experiment of physics is a test (and proof) of the validity of ECE theory (this is what objective physics is all about). There is not a single experiment or observation so far tested that ECE theory has been unable to describe. If this is some fluke, some quirk of nature, it is a remarkable fact in itself that these objectors should find a little bit interesting and should want to explain. Surely, it is much more likely, however, that ECE theory is correct. In fact, computer algebra has been used, with very many other cross checks, by researchers at AIAS to confirm the accuracy of key elements of the mathematics (see the AIAS websites) used in ECE theory. These objectors could independently check this for themselves using computer algebra ? if mathematical accuracy and fact is their real concern. They could then check the physics by means of experiments that can, to date, only be explained self-consistently using ECE theory. These include the Fraday Disc Generator, the Inverse Faraday Effect, the Aharonov-Bohm Effects, the Sagnac Effects etc, etc - as listed on the AIAS website at: http://aias.us/index.php?goto=showPageByTitle&pageTitle=Experimental_advantages_of_ECE_over_the_Standard_Model We at AIAS will not respond again to these inaccurate objections, that have no scientific value, from Bruhn et al on this site or any other. We will always respond, when not censored, to well intended points of science (on ECE theory or in any other field of science). The AIAS Board of Directors Comparitive impact table -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Institute / Department / Group Average Hits per Month 1 Alpha Inst. Advanced Study (AIAS) 267, 686 2 College Eng Sacramento State 43,803 3 Bristol School of Chemistry 18,206 4 Michigan Architectural Eng 16,135 5 YSU Ohio Engineering 10,993 6 Missouri Scanning El. Mic. 9,457 7 Russian Centre for Drug Chemistry 6,975 8 Physics Utah 4,317 9 North Texas Chemistry 3,607 10 Hong Kong Univ Buldings Eng. 3,490 11 Western Kentucky Univ. Site 2,104 12 Southern Missouri Photonics 1,897 13 Peking Inst. Theor. Phys. 1,865 14 Swedish Institute of Space Physics 1,119 15 Budapest Chem. Phys. 1,032 16 British Columbia Inst Tech. 864 17 Tulane chemistry 809 18 Colgate Physics 777 19 Univ of Plymouth (Britain) 746 20 Univ Cork Laser Spectroscopy 663 21 Groningen Computational phys 647 22 UNC Asheville chem 647 23 Rose Hullman Institute Applied Phys 624 24 Hong Kong Univ Sci Tech 580 25 Creighton Microchemistry 554 26 Michigan Computational Optical Phys 510 27 Collins group, Washington State 500 28 Maryland Dynamical Systems 489 29 UCSB Mechanical Eng 451 30 Winograd Group physics Penn State 399 31 Edinburgh Univ Hellenic Studies 369 32 Kettering Aplied Physics 335 33 Szeged Colloid Chemistry 309 34 TU Dresden Radiation Physics 281 35 Hauser group St Louis CC 272 36 Czech Acad Inst Plasma Physics 234 37 Beale group, physics, Univ. Colorado 232 38 Univ Maryland Dynamical Systems 217 39 Analytical Chemistry, Umea Univ., Sweden 206 40 Polomas chemistry 174 41 Weber, physics, San Diego State 153 42 Copenhagen Biology 118 43 Bonaventure physics 114 44 NCUE Taiwan 114 45 Copenhagen Chemistry 106 46 Budapest Physics 104 47 Boston Univ QSAD 86 48 Semiconductor Dept., Czech Acad. 85 49 La Salle Univ 79 50 SPAPL at UCLA 66 51 USC Kinetics 61 52 Inst. Physics Bhulaneswar 42 53 Imperial College Chemistry Video Library 39 54 Allendorf Group, Iowa Physics 33 55 Fachiash group Ben Gurion physics 32 56 Brigham Young physics students 17 57 Bruhn site, TU Darmstadt 10
Comment by Waldyr Rodrigues 26 February 2009 17:02

ANSWER TO OPEN LETTER, PART 1 ANSWER TO AN OPEN LETTER. In his blog at http://www.atomicprecision.com/blog/ (on February 24 2009) Dr. Evans wrote in an open letter to Rodrigues: "Your 'criticism' of ECE theory has been rejected for some years by the mathematical community because your work is incorrect. It attacks a well established geometry that has been taught since 1925. In the past the First Minister of the Welsh Assembly ordered some of your defamatory comments to be removed from a website hosted by a student at the University of Aberystwyth. The University removed your comments and with them your scientific credibility. Therefore no further notice should be taken of your so called 'shortcomings of ECE' site. This is motivated by your well known personal animosity, not by science. Your tempestuous ill-mannered diatribes are well known, and no notice has been taken of your so called ?criticism? of Cartan geometry and the Bianchi identity. They are still taught unchanged, your brand of pseudo-mathematics is not taught. The interest in ECE theory has increased 75% in the past few weeks. Your scientific papers are worthless because they essentially diatribes motivated by personal animosity. These tempestuous outbursts discredit science, they were mentioned to me by Straub of Elsevier. My original Sci Topics page already mentioned your incorrect and obsolete ?criticisms? and the site already refutes them in all detail, using entirely standard Cartan geometry. You ignore these refutations, and so you will be ignored in turn.British Civil List Scientist ." To his open letter I have to say that I never criticized Cartan geometry or the proof of Bianchi identity. What I criticized is the bad use of Cartan's differential geometry by Dr. Evans (and eventually other authors also).In particular I showed that what Dr. Evans calls the dual of the first Bianchi identity is a non sequitur. This has been done by finding the correct formula for th exteriro covariant derivative of the dual of the torsion 2-forms (which is very different from the one supposedly proved by Dr. Evans) and also by providing two obvious counter examples to his formula. All this (and much more) is absolutely crystal clear in my papers quoted in my previous posting,and Dr. Evans reaction is simply to distort the facts and to state that ?my ?criticism? of ECE has been rejected for some years by the mathematical community?. Now, to see if his statement has credibility, let us compare it with what reviewers of the Mathematical Reviews wrote about some of my papers criticizing ECE. Here I quote: (i)the review MR 2002d:78002that Professor P. Angl?(Laborat?ire de Math?tique Emile Picard, Institut de Math?tiques de Toulouse, Univ. Paul Sabatier)) wroteabout my paper : A. L. Trovon de Carvalho and Waldyr A. Rodrigues Jr., The non Sequitur Mathematics and Physics of the 'New Electrodynamics' Proposed by the AIAS Group, Random Oper. Stoch. Equs. 9 (3), 161-206 (2001) http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0302016 v2." The paper under review is a sound and thorough presentation of important facts concerning the theory of the electromagnetic field. The authors want to point out some mistakes, misconceptions, misunderstandings and flaws appearing in many papers published by a group of 15 physicists known as the AIAS group. Their statements are proved by using a modern presentation of Maxwell theory including Clifford bundles and principal and associated vector bundles for the presentation of gauge theories. It is convincingly proved by the authors of the paper under review that, for example, the following affirmations of the AIAS group are wrong: (a) 'The contemporary view that classical electromagnetism is a U(1) gauge theory, relies on the restricted received view of transverse plane waves, U(1) being isomorphic with O(2),the group of rotations in a plane' [sic]. (b) 'If there are longitudinal components available from the Heaviside-Maxwell equations then these cannot be represented by a U(1) gauge theory.? After a long analysis of their paper,the reviewer has to confirm his agreement that their text is mathematically correct, and the given arguments well structured."
Comment by Waldyr Rodrigues 26 February 2009 17:08

Â Â ANSWER TO OPEN LETTER 2. (ii)The review by Professor H-P. K?(Professor Emeritus, Univ. of London) about my paper: Waldyr A. Rodrigues Jr and Quintino A. G. de Souza, An Ambiguous Statement Called"Tetrad Postulate" and the Correct Field Equations Satisfied by the Tetrad Fields, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 14(12), 2095-2150 (2005), MR2007a:83003 http://arxiv.org/abs/math-ph/0411085v3. "Most of this long paper is devoted to acareful exposition of the basic theory of linear connections on a Lorentzian four-manifold in terms of the principal frame bundle. This is done to point out some fundamental errors in a paper by M.W. Evans [Found. Phys. Lett. 17 (2004), no. 5, 433-455; MR2088286 (2005e:58066)] and ambiguities in the notation in the physics literature that may lead to this confusion. Moreover, an elaborate formalism for operators on sections of Clifford bundles is presented in terms of which the Dirac, wave and Einstein equations are written."
Comment by Waldyr Rodrigues 26 February 2009 17:08

ANSWER TO OPEN LETTER 3. (iii)Finally, I quote some sentences from the review MR2348850 of my book: W. A. Rodrigues Jr. and E.C. de Oliveira, The Many Faces of Maxwell, Dirac and Einstein Equations. A Clifford Bundle Approach, Springer 2007, by Dr. A. Molgado (Dep. Phys., Univ. Aut?noma de Zacatecas): "The main intention of the present book is to familiarize the reader with the algebra and calculus within the Clifford bundle formalism, and, in particular, the book aims to investigate within this context some of the most important equations which describe physical phenomena, namely Maxwell, Dirac and Einstein equations. The authors consciously guide the reader through the mathematical apparatus of the Clifford bundle and explore certain hidden relations among the aforementioned equations, and, while doing this, they open some new paths to analyzing these equations?. As one is travelling through the contents of the book, one is eventually immersed in the many faces (as the authors call them) in which these equations can be cast by using the mathematical framework which is the object of study of the book, and one is presented with the opportunity to discover that these equations, originally reckoned as describing different phenomena, can be formally described in a similar fashion. This last point, which is by itself a very interesting issue, opens new venues for interesting research in the exploration of 'symmetries' of the theories that they describe....The text is written in a very readable manner and is complemented with plenty of worked-out exercises which are in the style of extended examples. It also contains an appendix including some basic concepts on the theory ofprincipal and vector bundles and the connections associated to them. From my personal point of view, the authors elegantly succeed in their ambitions and, in my opinion, their book could also serve as a textbook for graduate students in physics or mathematics." To end I must say that contrary to Dr. Evans statement that "your scientific papers are worthless because they essentially diatribes motivated by personal animosity", I am only against his bad use of Mathematics, being only interested in truth and beauty. And quoting J. Keats I say, "Beauty is truth, truth beauty. That is all ye know On Earth, and all ye need to know." Waldyr Alves Rodrigues Jr., Institute of Mathematics Statistics and Scientific Computation, IMECC-UNICAMP
Comment by Gerhard W. Bruhn 26 February 2009 18:02

In principle I welcome Gareth Evans' previous contribution above to debate though it is rather long. Therefore I'll restrict myself to the remarks on MWE's claimed antisymmetry of connection as under discussion. The rest of that verbose comment must be postponed to the future . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . GE: "an anti-symmetric commutator acts on four vector to produce a negative term, the antisymmetric torsion multiplied by the covariant derivative of a four vector, plus the Riemann tensor multiplied by the four vector." . . . . . GWB: More precise in Carroll's L.N. p.65, Eq.(3.66) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . GE: "The antisymmetric torsion is the difference of two antisymmetric connections." . . . . . . . . . . . . GWB: NO! This is WRONG: The ANTISYMMETRY of the CONNECTION is NOT REQUIRED. This is demonstrated by the example at http://www2.mathematik.tu-darmstadt.de/~bruhn/ConnectionTorsion.JPG where an Asymmetric connection is shown to yield an antisymmetric torsion as well. -- The antisymmetric torsion T sub mu,nu is the difference of the connection Gamma sub mu,nu and its transposed Gamma sub nu,mu (upper index suppressed): T sub mu,nu = Gamma sub mu,nu - Gamma sub nu,mu. T sub mu,nu is allways antisymmetric whatever the connection is (asymmetric in general). The torsion is zero if and only if the connection is symmetric. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . GE: "The indices of the commutator are mu and nu, and these same indices occur as the lower two indices of the connection. So if the connection is symmetric, the commutator vanishes." . . . . . GWB: NO! If the connection is symmetric then only the torsion term of the commutator vanishes, but not necessarily the curvature term. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . GE: "This means that it becomes the null operator acting on a four vector." . . . . . . GWB: Of course, NOT! Since the curvature term is left then the commutator is NOT the null operator. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . GE: "This produces zero torsion and zero curvature, and the gravitational field vanishes - making the standard model obsolete." . . . . . . . . . . . . GWB: NO! This is a flaw of thinking: The curvature is not zero in general in case of vanishing torsion. . . . . . . Gerhard W. Bruhn, Dep. of Mathematics, Darmstadt University of Technology
Comment by Gerhard W. Bruhn 27 February 2009 16:37

Continuation of my previous comment (GE = Gareth Evans, GWB = G.W. Bruhn) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . GE: "Bruhn's website, dedicated to finding even the smallest mathematical flaws in ECE theory (he seems to have little interest in the physics) receives on average around 10 visits a month." . . . . . GWB: My website points to a list of mathematical flaws in ECE theory, that's true. Whether these are small or even "smallest" is the question. The numerous typos in the ECE papers are the smallest flaws. They can be removed easily and are of no interest therefore. All other flaws are of interest. An example of that kind is Dr. Evans' so called "Cartan convention": q sup a sub mu q sup mu sub a = 1 . This is wrong, of course, and a pure invention of Dr. Evans, E. Cartan would turn in his grave about such nonsense: Due to the Einstein summation convention the summation is to be executed w.r.t. a and mu yielding the value n in in e-dimensional case, hence 4 in case of spacetime. This flaw itself is of minor importance; what is a factor 4 between friends ;-), I commented on it once, however, it shows the author's low level of knowledge in tensor algebra: Just now Dr. Evans announced a "Second Definitve Refutation" at http://www.atomicprecision.com/blog/2009/02/26/fwd-second-definitve-refutation/ after "having shown this to the working group first for any comments, and if all agree will type it up." Apparently, someone has resisted. Since this "Definitve Refutation" is a long time in coming. Meanwhile the impatient reader will find some information at http://www2.mathematik.tu-darmstadt.de/~bruhn/CommentaryPaper89.html . -- The reader will find an "application"of that "New Math" where Dr. Evans attempts to prove his "Evans Lemma of Differential geometry" which was completely unknown before: See http://www2.mathematik.tu-darmstadt.de/~bruhn/OnECElemma180209.pdf . This example shows how apparently negligible lacks of knowledge become relevant to the whole ECE theory. -- Concerning the number of hits: Nobody knows the thoughts and reasons of the visitors. However, nobody can deny that Evans' website has a good entertainment value that might attract visitors. My sites are - compared with this - demanding some previous mathematical knowledge - that's not everybody's cup of tea. . . . . . . Gerhard W. Bruhn, Dep. of Mathematics, Darmstadt University of Technology
Comment by Gerhard W. Bruhn 28 February 2009 16:29

Continuation #2 of my previous comment (GE = Gareth Evans, GWB = G.W. Bruhn) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . GE: "seems to have little interest in the physics.": . . . . . . GWB: Surely, a math based theory like Evans theory should be mathematically consistent: A theory that contains a lot of mathematical inconsistencies is like the weather forecast in the times a century ago: No reliable conclusions can be drawn from it, it is only a "theory". However, a very important example of my interests in the PHYSICS of ECE "theory" should be mentioned here also: Dr. Evans' O(3) theory, the basis of the later ECE theory, is based on the physical assumption that a circularly polarized plane electromagnetic wave in vacuo is always accompanied by a "ghost field", a constant magnetic B-field in longitudinal direction. Hereby a certain O(3) symmetry condition must be fulfilled in addition: The transversal amplitude must agree with the (constant) longitudinal amplitude. That is a suggestion that must be examined carefully: . . . . . . . . . FIRST of all: Evans' hypothesis is compatible with the homogeneous Maxwell equations, since the additional constant longitudinal B(3) field fulfils the Maxwell equations separately. . . . . . . . . . HOWEVER, what about the O(3) symmetry? A plane wave appears as such in all inertial systems due to the invariance of the Maxwell equations under Lorentz transformations, while the electric and magnetic fields are subject to a mixed linear transformation, the Lorentz transfomation of the electromagnetic fields. Dr. Evans felt correctly obliged to check the invariance property of his O(3) hypothesis. In 2000 he wrote a paper titled "On the Application of the Lorentz Transformation in O(3) Electrodynamics", APEIRON Vol 7 http://redshift.vif.com/JournalFiles/Pre2001/V07NO1PDF/V07N1EV1.pdf where he gave a positive answer: The O(3) hypothesis is Lorentz-invariant. . . . . . . . . . However, in 2007 I came across that paper. It turned out that Dr. Evans had erroneously assumed the invariance of wave number and frequency while from the Doppler effect it is well-known that both change under Lorentz transformations. The simple correction of that physical flaw lead to the result of NON-invariance of the O(3)-hypothesis which could have been obtained already by Dr. Evans if he had correctly used the transformation properties of wave number and frequency. This result was published in the note On the Non-Lorentz-Invariance of M.W. EVANS? O(3)-Symmetry Law, Foundations of Physics (2008), Vol. 38, 1, pp.3-6 http://www.springerlink.com/content/x52062124l848727/fulltext.pdf . . . . . . . . The result completely agreed with an independent calculation of the O(3) transformation I had published already one year before in G.W. Bruhn, No Lorentz Property of MW Evans' O(3)-Symmetry Law, Physica Scripta (2006), Vol.74, pp.1-2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The result means that the O(3) hypothesis is physically wrong. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . But the O(3)-symmetry is demanded for the most simple case of a spacetime, for the special case of a Minkowski spacetime, which in Evans' GCUFT or ECE theory is later on generalized to an arbitrary spacetime. Evans' claim in the above Synopsis of the "generally covariant B(3) field" is physically wrong therefore. -- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . There is something strange with the Evans paper cited above: It has completely VANISHED from Evans' listing of ECE papers as given above. The reader might ask for the reasons for tacitly removing such a basic paper to ECE theory. . . . . . . Gerhard W. Bruhn, Dep. of Mathematics, Darmstadt University of Technology

About SciTopics

SciTopics is a free expert-generated knowledge-sharing service for the scientific community. Developed to serve as an information and collaboration service for researchers, SciTopics offers authors a dynamic, quick, informal yet authoritative online publication platform.

Recent and most cited articles

provided by Scopus

Updated 02 Mar 2009

Most recent

Most cited

1. The interaction of three fields in ECE theory: The inverse Faraday effect
(2008) Evans, M.W.
Physica B: Condensed Matter pp.517-521 Cited 0 times.

2. Einstein equations for tetrad fields
(2008) Torres-Silva, H.
Ingeniare pp.85-90 Cited 2 times.

3. The resonant Coulomb law of Einstein Cartan Evans theory
(2008) Evans, M.W. | Eckardt, H.
Paper 63 of Evans' Theory pp. Cited 1 times.

Web search results

provided by Scirus

Updated 02 Mar 2009

1. A remark on an ansatz by M.W. Evans and the so-called Einstein-Cartan-Evans unified field theory
Dec 2006
M.W.Evans tried to relate the electromagnetic field strength to the torsion of a Riemann- Cartan spacetime. We show that this ansatz is untenable for at least two reasons: (i) Geometry: Torsion is related to the (external)...
[http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0612026]

2. The interaction of three fields in ECE theory: The inverse Faraday effect
Mar 2008
The simultaneous interaction of three fundamental fields is illustrated in Einstein Cartan Evans ( ECE) theory with reference to the effect of gravitation on the inverse Faraday effect. The three-field interaction in this case is that of the. ..
[http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=GatewayUR...]

3. An assessment of Evans' unified field theory I
Feb 2008
Evans developed a classical unified field theory of gravitation and electromagnetism on the background of a spacetime obeying a Riemann- Cartan geometry. This geometry can be characterized by an orthonormal coframe theta...
[http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0703116]

You may be also be interested in these SciTopics pages.

Rutherford Backscattering Spectrometry (RBS)

Einstein Cartan Evans Theory

Further reading

Selected links

Comments

About SciTopics

Table of contents

Recent and most cited articles

Web search results

Related keywords

Related pages