Rainer,

It is now Feb 2010 and the meeting called for has not yet been held. I understand that Bruce is ill, and this must be the reason, but do you have any information on his recovery or indication that the meeting will be held soon?

Also, your suggested prepatory discussion forum has not been established, as far as I can tell. I agree with you that a dedicated forum to discuss the proposition prior to the meeting would be very helpful.

Doug

Hi Bruce,

Hope your recovery is going well.

Rainer wrote

All Members and Directors are invited to present papers at the conference describing their evidence supporting one of these options or opposing others.

In the mean time, a special forum will be available on the ISUS website for the publication of papers and discussion of this issue. All postings must be professional and specific to the topic with no personal attacks or innuendo allowed.

When can we expect to see this new forum?

Doug

In lieu of any other instructions on how to submit abstracts of papers to be presented at the conference, I will post it here:

Title: The "Glaring Lacuna"

Author: Doug Bundy

Abstract:

The failure of Larson’s RST-based model, to provide a means for calculating the atomic spectra of the elements, in any way comparable to the success of quantum mechanics, has long been an embarrassment to students of the new system of theory. It is shown here that this failure is most likely due to the fact that Larson lacked the scalar mathematics needed to adequately describe discrete units of scalar motion, which would allow the mathematical definition of these units, combinations of them and relations between them, such that an atomic structure rich enough to accommodate the observed spectral behavior could be constructed as a consequence of the fundamental postulates of the system. It is explained how this insight supports the contention that the second postulate is indispensable to the new system of theory.

Have the instructions referred to above been posted? I can't find them, if so.

The creator of the Reciprocal System of physical theory, Dewey Larson, built an unprecedented structure of understanding based on two postulates which he called "Fundamental" postulates.

These are as follows, taken from New Light on Space and Time, the book which first introduced me to the Reciprocal System in 1970:

First Fundamental Postulate

The physical universe is composed entirely of one component, space-time, existing in three dimensions, in discrete units, and in two reciprocal forms, space and time.

Second Fundamental Postulate

The physical universe conforms to the relations of ordinary commutative mathematics, its magnitudes are absolute, and its geometry is Euclidean.

The first expresses the meat of the theory, embodying all of the novel concepts that provide the extraordinary ability of the RS to solve the problems that have baffled legacy physicists for generations.

The second is of an entirely different sort; it doesn't contain any new or revolutionary ideas. Rather, it is merely a limitation on the operators allowed in the development of the first.

I believe that Dewey created the second postulate to clearly define the divergence of his theory from the three theories that dominated physics during the period of his creative work: The Special and General Theories of Relativity and the Quantum theory.

The inferences are direct and unmistakable: "ordinary commutative mathematics" is directed toward Quantum Mechanics, "magnitudes are absolute" toward Special Relative, and "geometry is Euclidean" toward General Relativity.

It is clear that the second postulate is in no way on equal footing with the first. On its face, it appears at best to be more like a corollary. I believe that in his effort to distance himself from the failed theories that were sucking the lifeblood of creative scientists worldwide, Dewey saddled himself and subsequent researchers with an unnecessary and unreasonable impediment to the ultimate and complete development of the promise offered by the first.

It is likely that the lack of significant theoretical progress since Dewey's passing in 1991 can be thus attributed.

The time has come to take a hard look at the status and validity of the Second Postulate. I propose that a general membership and director meeting of ISUS be convened before the end of 2009 to resolve the question:

Should the Second Postulate of the Reciprocal System of Physics, for the purposes of the International Society of Unified Science, be affirmed, or, in the alternative, reduced in status, modified, or eliminated?

All Members and Directors are invited to present papers at the conference describing their evidence supporting one of these options or opposing others.

In the mean time, a special forum will be available on the ISUS website for the publication of papers and discussion of this issue. All postings must be professional and specific to the topic with no personal attacks or innuendo allowed.

All members of ISUS are driven by a unique desire to gain a better understanding of the nature of the physical universe.

This is our common ground. We need to keep this in mind in all our discussions and when formulating our comments. As Dewey so poignantly demonstrated in NOTHING BUT MOTION, emotions and "beliefs" are the main impediment to scientific progress. We must not allow such human weakness to obstruct ISUS as it has legacy physics.

Rainer Huck,
ISUS Director and Treasurer