Recently L. Felker broadcasted an article "Einstein Was Right!?" to the AIAS fellows to be submitted to SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN. This article (quoted here by [1a]) is a revised version of the web article [1]. Both are excerpts from Felkers book manuscript [2] where he tries to "explain" MWE's GCUFT.

A letter of recommendation from EMyrone@aol.com followed on
We, July 6 2005 09:12

*
Subject: for AIAS Sites : Article by Lar Felker
for AIAS Sites
This is a well written and comprehensible article by Lar Felker and with his permission I think it
deserves a box of its own on the www.aias.us and www.atomicprecision.com websites. I see no reason
for rejection, rejection would show that the editor is being unreasonable and censorious in view of the fact
that the whole physics world has accepted the theory. This should be unsurprising because the whole
physics world has accepted Cartan and Riemann. I am not saying that the unified field theory is
everything. Far from it, but its mathematical structure gives the mathematical structure of all the major
equations of classical and quantum mechanics. There is plenty of room for interesting debate about the
meaning of the tetrad wavefunction and many other topics.
In humour, from Wilde's "The Importance of Being Earnest":
"I dislike argument, argument is vulgar and often convincing."
MWE
*

A similar recommendation from MWE exists for Felker's book. Thus, we may consider L. Felker as MWE's authorized speaker:

Confirming this L. Felker tried to defend his master in [3], where a critical review by Chronostalker on the mathematical prerequisites of MWE's GCUFT had appeared.

Following Oscar Wilde's advice from above we shall be so *vulgar* as to discuss here
two parts of L. Felker's article:

The **tetrad is a matrix** defined
q^{a}_{μ}
where q^{a}_{μ} =
**V ^{a}/V^{μ}**
is built of 16 elements
which are

The author

(a) has neither understood the tetrad and vector concepts

(b) nor knows the elements of vector algebra.

**ad (a):**
A tetrad is a basis of four (tetra) vectors **e**_{a}
of the tangent space at some point P of a manifold, not to be confused with the coefficient
scheme (q^{a}_{μ}). It's a substitute of
the coordinate tangent vectors
∂_{μ} := ^{∂}/_{∂xμ}
at P. The coefficients q^{a}_{μ} appear in a linear representation of
the basis vectors ∂_{μ} relative to the vectors **e**_{a};
the representation
of a given tetrad {**e**_{a}} by a matrix (q^{a}_{μ})
depends on the coordinate system:

(1)
∂_{μ} = q^{a}_{μ} **e**_{a} .

This requires that the coefficients q^{a}_{μ} form a nonsingular
matrix (q^{a}_{μ}), the inverse of which is denoted by

(2)
(q^{μ}_{a})
:= (q^{a}_{μ})^{−1}.

A given vector **V** of the tangent space at P can be represented relative to the
basis {**e**_{a}}

(3)
**V** = V^{a}**e**_{a}

and relative to the basis {∂_{μ}} as well

(4)
**V** = V^{μ}∂_{μ} .

From eqns. (1), (2) follows immediately

(5)
V^{μ} = q^{μ}_{a}V^{a}

and

(6)
V^{a} = q^{a}_{μ}V^{μ} .

By calling V^{a} and V^{μ} "vectors" Felker confuses vectors with
their components. The same holds for calling the coefficient scheme
(q^{a}_{μ})
a tetrad: The tetrad is the system of vectors

(7)
**e**_{a}
=
q^{μ}_{a} ∂_{μ} .

**ad (b):**
Felker's "equation"
q^{a}_{μ} = V^{a}/V^{μ}
ignores that the equation (6) cannot be resolved for q^{a}_{μ}
by *division* by V^{μ} since its right hand side

(8)
q^{a}_{μ}V^{μ}
=
q^{a}_{0}V^{0}
+
q^{a}_{1}V^{1}
+
q^{a}_{2}V^{2}
+
q^{a}_{3}V^{3}
.

is - due to summation convention - a sum of four summands and not a single term.

**Remark**
A quite similar error can be found in one of Evans' "proofs" of the tetrade postulate
reviewed in [4].

Any asymmetric matrix can be broken into its symmetric and antisymmetric parts.

q^{a}_{μ}
=
q^{a}_{μ}^{(S)}
+
q^{a}_{μ}^{(A)}

q^{a}_{μ}
= (symmetric) + (antisymmetric)

= gravitation + electromagnetism

= curvature + torsion

= distance + turning

This rule does not hold if both indices, here a and μ, are of *different*
type: The index a refers to the tetrad basis {**e**_{a}}, while μ
refers to the coordinate basis {∂_{μ}} as is indicated by latin and greek
letters and their different positions (up and down): Let Q:=(q^{a}_{μ})
and denote Q' the transposed matrix.
Then, as is well-known, the matrices
Q^{(S)} := ½(Q + Q') and Q^{(A)} := ½(Q − Q') are the symmetric part
and the antisymmetric part of Q respectively. However, Q^{(S)} and Q^{(A)}
*fail to be tensors* in general. **Hence the above physical conclusions
are complete nonsense.**

L. Felker has proven to be mathematically unable for defending his master's GCUFT. So MWE himself is challenged to intervene, e.g. by giving a contribution in Chronostalker's Forum [3].

[1]
John B. Hart and Laurence G. Felker:
The Tetrad and Symmetry in the Evans Unified Field Theory

http://www.aias.us/Comments/Art%202%20of%20X%20Tetrad%20and%20Sym%20in%20Evans%20UFT.ZIP

[2]
Laurence G. Felker: The Evans Equations of Unified Field Theory

Descriptive Book for All Audiences (2.8 MB)

http://www.atomicprecision.com/new/Evans%20Equations%20of%20Unified%20Field%20Theory%20Rev%203.pdf

[3]
Chronostalker Forum:

http://opensys.blogsome.com/2005/07/01/

[4]
G.W. Bruhn: M.W. Evans' New Proof for the Tetrade Postulate

http://www.mathematik.tu-darmstadt.de/~bruhn/New_Tetrad-Proof.htm