[Physics] your Theory of Everything

[Arend Lammertink]

Hello Lee,

Thanks for the reference to Lorentz. I was unaware he had a theory of
gravity. Could be interesting to check out.

I've cc-ed the physics list. Some discussion might come forth there.

Regards,

Arend.


Arend Lammertink, MScEE,
Goor, The Netherlands.

Please note that I'm currently overwhelmed with e-mails. If you're
interested in discussing science and/or physics, please consider
subscribing to the mailing list I created for that purpose:

http://mail.tuks.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/physics


On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 1:40 AM, William Shimmin <leeshimmin at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Dear Arend,
>
> I’m pretty much out of the loop these days, and I’m not enthusiastic about
> joining the lists.  I read your article with great interest.  I’m afraid it
> has not budged me from my present stance regarding electromagnetism.
> Perhaps I’m just too stubborn.  You and I are in agreement that Maxwell’s
> Equations are a mess.  I’ll give you a starter opinion: not unreasonably,
> Maxwell made a “theory” based on the *net* fields.  Unfortunately in my
> opinion, ignoring the underlying electric fields will invariably give a
> sadly incomplete theory of electromagnetism.
>
> My hero is Hendrik Antoon Lorentz.  He could see that the individual
> underlying fields had relevance.  Please study his 1900 paper called (in
> English) Considerations on Gravity.  Incidentally, I happen to believe that
> he lays out the correct theory of gravity in that paper.  In retrospect it
> seems obvious.  I would really like to hear your response to that paper.  I
> presume you will read it in the original Dutch.
>
> Yours in the search,        Lee Shimmin
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.tuks.nl/pipermail/physics/attachments/20161019/78acbf1c/attachment.html>