So far, I have written four books that cover quantised inertia, among other things like the scientific method and what it is like to be a maverick scientist, from various points of view.
I was invited to write my first book, Physics from the Edge (2014) by World Scientific. The title had three meanings. First of all, quantised inertia's main claim is that the cosmic edge (horizon) affects inertia here, so it is indeed physics from the edge of the cosmos. The second meaning is that I felt myself to be on the edge of the physics community. The third meaning was an allusion to Carrie Fisher's Postcards from the Edge... partly because I always fancied Carrie Fisher. The book introduces QI and some applications of it. You can get a good feel for the early years of QI. The theory was slightly different back then. Many things have improved but some nuances have been lost. It is expensive though, as it was publish as a monograph.
My second book (2021) was called Falling Up. It is a sci-fi novelette, published on Amazon. I wrote it, off and on, from about 2004 to 2021 so it contains bits from the entire history of QI. The antigrav lab scene, for example, was written before I derived QI and was living on a station platform (in a tiny flat I must add!). It has many good reviews on Amazon and 4.7 stars. One reviewer said that "If Frank McCourt was to write a sci-fi novel it would read something like this." Excited by that comment, I read his novel, Angela's Ashes, and it seemed almost grammarless! I'll take it as a compliment anyway.
My third book (2023) was called Hacking the Cosmos, and is also a novelette. It was written more recently, as you will see from the social environment I describe. It introduces QI from the new information standpoint and also describes the feeling of alienation from the physics community that I've felt, almost as if I was indeed guilty of destroying the cosmos. I refer to some of the relevant QI papers in the book.
My fourth book (2024) called Quantised Accelerations is the second QI textbook and was published by Robert Zubrin's Polaris Books. I wanted with this one to demonstrate the old empirical approach (i.e. genuine science) that has been almost entirely lost in these times. The book starts by discussing 54 anomalies that cannot be explained by modern physics. It then introduces QI, and shows how QI explains most of the anomalies. I also discuss applications: thrust, power and interstellar travel, and some consequences for philosophy. I wrote it to be accessible, there are equations, but they are simple, and I drew cartoons and schematics to help explain the ideas. It is still selling well and has 4.7 stars on Amazon.
I have loved writing them, and I hope you enjoy reading them.
10 comments:
Am reading Quantised Accelerations. Very cool.
Could QI be interacting with this particle? It goes from massless at the speed of light, to having mass at a different velocity/direction.
Enjoyed Quantised Accelerations!
Sorry, forgot link:
https://newatlas.com/physics/particle-gains-loses-mass-depending-direction/
Comments please; obviously has interesting properties regarding massless propulsion!
https://phys.org/news/2024-12-particle-mass.html
I bought Dr Mike’s first book. I highly recommend it.
“ The book starts by discussing 54 anomalies that cannot be explained by modern physics. It then introduces QI, and shows how QI explains most of the anomalies. I also discuss applications: thrust, power and interstellar travel, and some consequences for philosophy. I wrote it to be accessible, there are equations, but they are simple, and I drew cartoons and schematics to help explain the ideas. It is still selling well and has 4.7 stars on Amazon.”
Sounds brilliant, is it an update to Physics from the Edge though?
I’ll get it after Christmas. Will you ever write a less accessible book?
A less accessible book might need to be written to win over other physicists (I’m a chemist, as much as this blog inspired me to get a BSc after all).
Hi Mike, how does QI meld with Fisher information?
Hey Mike, just a thought for you, could detectable unrah emissions be what where seeing in sonolumenecent bubble collapse that diverge from blackbody radiation models? The deceleration the structure experiences on complete collapse is on the order of billions of gs.
I bought Quantised Accelerations and left it on a bedside table in case an overnight guest would be interested. He was and now another mind is considering your theory. Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!
Many thanks Big Island, and Best Wishes to you for 2025!
Hi Mike,
Sorry to spam you, saw this on Sabine H’s channel.
The new paper hasn’t re-invented QI but it has put another stake in the heart of dark matter!
https://academic.oup.com/mnrasl/article/537/1/L55/7926647
Supernovae evidence for foundational change to cosmological models
Antonia Seifert, Zachary G Lane, Marco Galoppo, Ryan Ridden-Harper, David L Wiltshire
Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society: Letters, Volume 537, Issue 1, February 2025, Pages L55–L60, https://doi.org/10.1093/mnrasl/slae112
Published: 19 December 2024
“ABSTRACT
We present a new, cosmologically model-independent, statistical analysis of the Pantheon Type Ia Supernovae spectroscopic data set, improving a standard methodology adopted by Lane et al. We use the Tripp equation for supernova standardization alone, thereby avoiding any potential correlation in the stretch and colour distributions. We compare the standard homogeneous cosmological model, i.e. spatially flat cold dark matter (CDM), and the timescape cosmology which invokes backreaction of inhomogeneities. Timescape, while statistically homogeneous and isotropic, departs from average Friedmann–LemaĆ®tre–Robertson–Walker evolution, and replaces dark energy by kinetic gravitational energy and its gradients, in explaining independent cosmological observations. When considering the entire Pantheon sample, we find very strong evidence () in favour of timescape over CDM. Furthermore, even restricting the sample to redshifts beyond any conventional scale of statistical homogeneity, , timescape is preferred over CDM with . These results provide evidence for a need to revisit the foundations of theoretical and observational cosmology.”
Post a Comment