[Physics] Why is a new beginning in physics necessary? *

[Ilja Schmelzer]

2016-12-10 18:42 GMT+01:00, Master Inventor <mdaniel at masterinventor.com>:
> My point in all this is that physicists have been operating in a fog since
> the  war and have confined themselves to playing with safe toys, like
> particle accelerators, that will never create useful new physics.

Useful or not, the accelerators have given us the actually most
fundamental theory, namely the Standard Model of particle physics.

And this theory has sufficient observational support to survive time
in the same way as former theories of established physics - as
approximations of some better theory.

Nonetheless, to have a chance to find that better theory, one has to
know the SM, and to use it as a starting point.  There is no
alternative - the physicists who have found new theories have always
known the actually established theories too. They were open to modify
them, even to modify their basic postulates, but nonetheless existing
theory was the starting point.

Say, Einstein knew that inertial mass and gravitational mass are equal
in Newtonian gravity, and used this as a starting point for developing
a completely new theory.  Without knowing Newtonian gravity, he would
not have had this starting point.

Similarly, I think that those who do not know the SM have no starting
point for future development of physics.

> P.S. The 8 geometric dimensions do not answer the question as to the
> existence of the aether,  nor have I addressed how electric, magnetic,
> gravitational and other fields interact with the dimensions.  It will take
> generations of scientists to work that out.

I do not think so.  The first ether theory in agreement with the SM of
particle physics already exists, and is even published in a mainstream
physics journal.

See http://ilja-schmelzer.de/matter/ for details.