**A Challenge to Academe**

A challenge is issued to academe to: 1.) Offer a better explanation than Pulsoid Theory for the current enigmas that result from the irreconcilability of the current Standard Models of physics; 2.) Find an error in the mathematics or logic of Pulsoid Theory, as presented, that would disqualify it as a leading candidate for a Theory of Everything; 3.) Debate that current theoretical physics is based upon other than: a.) Forces/interactions that, as defined by Standard Models, are entirely metaphysical; b.) Time that is undefined; and, c.) mathematics that is "incomplete"; 4.) Debate that the Elliptical Constant does not underlie: a.) the definition of fundamental, intrinsic time (FIT); b.) The ellipsoidal form of fundamental quanta; c.) The Natural geometric source of numbers . . . including a Proof of One within any given Natural system.

To avoid conceding a point made concerning the mass of neutrinos, long argued with Fred Reines, the standard definition of the ephemeral "particle" was quietly changed by academe. In similar manner, the ludicrous definition of black holes, also, appears to be morphing. No longer do astronomers dismiss accelerating, galactic recession; nor, cosmologists refute the possibility of "dark" energy and "dark" matter.

Despite observation and logic to the contrary, the mass media, trade media, scientific journals, and many world-class scientists still speak of massive black holes at the center of galaxies as fact without disclaimers to the contrary stating that: black holes are theoretical. The impression that infinitesimal black holes abound is about as common an accepted understanding as are the tenets of Christianity.

Theoretical physics is constrained with its acceptance of the Big Bang as a Standard Model. Cosmology, if not all of physics, is irreconcilable until an alternative, structural force that opposes gravity's illusion of "attraction-at-a-distance" replaces the Big Bang concept of centripetal forces; thus as it is, the force of Cosmic Inertia must be a requirement as the reactive force to the "compression" of "common gravity."

Recently, the Nobel Prize was shared (October 3, 2006) for strong verification of the Big Bang; yet, no academic astrophysicist can explain how one "bang" created the acceleration that was observed by the Hubble Space Telescope more than a decade earlier, concerning galactic recession.

Pulsoid Theory is a philosophy of ultimate reduction that depends upon rigorous logic and definitions; reconciliation with both scientific observation and prior physical theory; and, most importantly, Pulsoid Theory is understandable by most laypersons. As such, Pulsoid Theory is truly . . . a Paradigm

A response to “A Challenge to Academe” could take the form of disproving the following argument and statement:

The mathematical descriptions, of the harmonies and resonances of motion, described by Pulsoid Theory, that heuristically describe the ellipsoidal geometry of “string-like” phenomena, are applicable to establishing fundamental concepts that can resurrect the much maligned string theory and its derivations; as well as, reinforcing the concepts of loop quantum gravity theories of “space.”

Or, more simply, disprove that there is not an Elliptical Constant, for

Since May 1955 no physicist "of stature" from academe has accepted a public debate, or a private debate, with an eclectic group of scholars, concerning the mathematical, philosophical, or scientific premises of Pulsoid Theory. During the intervening years, since 1955, many of the contentious arguments that have been offered as provocations for such debate have, themselves, become part of mainstream, intellectual, academic, theoretical acceptance.*any*elliptical shape, that is not related to, or analogous to, the Planck Constants. That is: more simply, demonstrate that the Elliptical Constant is not the Rosetta Stone that underlies a rationalization for all the phenomena of everything that exists; as well as, demonstrating the logic for the radius of*Infinity.*To avoid conceding a point made concerning the mass of neutrinos, long argued with Fred Reines, the standard definition of the ephemeral "particle" was quietly changed by academe. In similar manner, the ludicrous definition of black holes, also, appears to be morphing. No longer do astronomers dismiss accelerating, galactic recession; nor, cosmologists refute the possibility of "dark" energy and "dark" matter.

Despite observation and logic to the contrary, the mass media, trade media, scientific journals, and many world-class scientists still speak of massive black holes at the center of galaxies as fact without disclaimers to the contrary stating that: black holes are theoretical. The impression that infinitesimal black holes abound is about as common an accepted understanding as are the tenets of Christianity.

Theoretical physics is constrained with its acceptance of the Big Bang as a Standard Model. Cosmology, if not all of physics, is irreconcilable until an alternative, structural force that opposes gravity's illusion of "attraction-at-a-distance" replaces the Big Bang concept of centripetal forces; thus as it is, the force of Cosmic Inertia must be a requirement as the reactive force to the "compression" of "common gravity."

Recently, the Nobel Prize was shared (October 3, 2006) for strong verification of the Big Bang; yet, no academic astrophysicist can explain how one "bang" created the acceleration that was observed by the Hubble Space Telescope more than a decade earlier, concerning galactic recession.

Pulsoid Theory is a philosophy of ultimate reduction that depends upon rigorous logic and definitions; reconciliation with both scientific observation and prior physical theory; and, most importantly, Pulsoid Theory is understandable by most laypersons. As such, Pulsoid Theory is truly . . . a Paradigm

*Shift!***ADDENDUM**A response to “A Challenge to Academe” could take the form of disproving the following argument and statement:

The mathematical descriptions, of the harmonies and resonances of motion, described by Pulsoid Theory, that heuristically describe the ellipsoidal geometry of “string-like” phenomena, are applicable to establishing fundamental concepts that can resurrect the much maligned string theory and its derivations; as well as, reinforcing the concepts of loop quantum gravity theories of “space.”

**Pulsoid Theory (PT) more than unifies the Standard Model forces;**

PT reconciles the observable, fundamental concepts of Relativity (SR & GR);

Quantum Theory (QT); Quantum Electrodynamics (QED); Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD);

Super Symmetry (SUSY); String Theory (ST); Loop Quantum Gravity (LQG); Quintessence; Infinity;

Quantum Entanglement; Number Theory (NT); spin; and, accelerating, galactic recession; and, likely the most significant;

The locus of the single,

PT reconciles the observable, fundamental concepts of Relativity (SR & GR);

Quantum Theory (QT); Quantum Electrodynamics (QED); Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD);

Super Symmetry (SUSY); String Theory (ST); Loop Quantum Gravity (LQG); Quintessence; Infinity;

Quantum Entanglement; Number Theory (NT); spin; and, accelerating, galactic recession; and, likely the most significant;

The locus of the single,

*perpetual*Universe.©Copyright 2005-2017 by Brunardot. All rights reserved.

Terms: Dialogue21.com, Brunardot, and Pulsoid Theory must be cited.

Sorry! This Thread has not been completed.

Please Bookmark and return to this site often.

If there is an immediate need for information,

Please note that any private correspondence

may be edited and anonymously posted unless

requested otherwise.

Every effort will be made to expedite a reply

with the requested information.

Please Bookmark and return to this site often.

If there is an immediate need for information,

*please*e**-**mail directly at the below*"Click"*link.Please note that any private correspondence

may be edited and anonymously posted unless

requested otherwise.

Every effort will be made to expedite a reply

with the requested information.

Please ask questions.

With questions it’s possible to know if comments are

logical and convincing; or whether clarification is required.

With questions it’s possible to know if comments are

logical and convincing; or whether clarification is required.

**If images don’t display, "click" your web browser Refresh Icon.**