An Introduction to
Web Publication by Mountain Man Graphics, Australia
and perception and inference
together with their fallacies
are useful for self-understanding"
-- Dignaga (India, about 550AD)
What is Process Physics?
In no way should these personal notes reflect unfavorably upon their professional work - for these notes are simply my opinions, and resource and reference notes as a student of life, and of nature.
At the present time, these notes are brief and unstructured. This aspect will change in the course of time, for I am resolved that process physics is the foremost of aether theories. In a separate publication and resource index entitled Modern theories of the ancient Aether I have listed process physics accordingly.
It should be noted that the word aether is not used at all in the formal peer-reviewed publications of process physics. Instead the term quantum foam is utilised. It should be recalled that a distinctive retrospective feature of the last at least 50 years of peer-reviewed publication process was to dismiss any article or work referencing the term "aether". There is indeed a parallel in the disciplines of psychology and psychiatry (at the peer-reviewed level) which consistently dismissed articles referencing the "C-word" in the first half of the 20th century (1900 -1950). The "C-Word" of course being "consciousness".
These disciplines would not countenance publication of discussion which referenced the word consciousness. Such has been the case with the discipline of physics and "aether" also since those times.
At any rate, I perceive process physics to be classed into those category of scientific theories that may be termed "theories of aether". Specifically, process physics addresses the existence and emergent properties of a cosmos-pervading substance of the finest (subtlest) form, the fifth of the ancient elements of nature.
Hitherto, attendent to any physics was an implicit prevailing philosophy which included the notions of space and time and geometry, and their inter-relationship, in the axiomatical constructions of its ediface. Process physics on the other hand starts with a very simple, and in fact it will be argued, a more fundamental assumption (see below), from which these notions of space, and time, and geometry (and gravity) emerge as consequences.
Falls Creek, OZ
5th May 2004
- Reg Cahill
PROCESS PHYSICS: From QUANTUM FOAM to GENERAL RELATIVITY
The refreshing thing about the program is that the author (Reg Cahill) openly admits into the foundations of science a new lease of life, and does so in a very real sense, by consideration of the above assumption - incorporating the emergent property of self-organising systems - at the foundations of science.
Process Physics represents a return to natural science, as distinct from what might be termed technological science. Mankind has explored the technological side of nature and has exploited a small number of nature's myriad facets. Technological production is up, and everything is looking good except for a few small and obscure rainclouds that have crossed the horizon of theory (Godel, Turing, Chaitin) and look to be consistently depositing rain on some quarters of the logic space.
Present day understanding of the nature of gravity is mathematical and not physical. We think we know some "Universal Laws", and that they are being tenured in the mathematical physics department, not the physical mathematics department. Increasing precision is manifest in our understanding of technological physics. On the contrary, in 1998 CODATA increased the uncertainty in relation to the natural physics associated with the measurement of G from 0.013% to 0.15%.
Process physics delivers a account of the mechanism behind the phenomenom of gravity that might be described as an inflow, or sink model:
The treatment of process physics however is unique in that firstly it has been published in peer-reviewed physics journals whereas most (but not all) of the other articles have not. Secondly, process physics encapsulates a profound, but not new, logic and philsophy, and it does so rigorously and comprehensively.
The becoming or processing model of reality dates back to Heraclitus of Ephesus (540-480 BCE) who argued that common sense is mistaken in thinking that the world consists of stable things; rather the world is in a state of flux. The appearance of 'things' depend upon the flux for their continuity and identity. What needs to be explained, Heraclitus argued, is not change, but the appearance of stability. With process physics western science and philosophy is now able to move beyond the moribund non-process mindset.
While it was the work of Godel who demonstrated beyond any doubt that the non-process system of thought had fundamental limitations; implicit in his work is that the whole reductionist mindset that goes back to Thales of Miletus could not offer, in the end, an effective account of reality. However the notion that there were limits to syntactical or symbolic encoding is actually very old. Priest  has given an account of that history. However in the East the Buddhists in particular were amazingly advanced in their analysis and comprehension of reality.
Stcherbatsky , writing about the extraordinary achievements of Buddhist logic in the C6 and C7 CE, noted that;
PP09 - Interferometer experiments
Substantive to an earlier analysis by Munera (1998) .......
Michelson-Morley (1881) results not null, instead 6.22 km/s (air)
Michelson-Morley (1887) results not null, instead 6.80 km/s (air)
Miller (1925) results were not null, instead 8.22 km/s (air)
Illingworth (1927) results were not null, instead 3.13 km/s (He)
An effect of latitude is present.
PP10 - "Dialectric Mode" Interferometer experiments
Only the results for vacuum interferometer experiments are truly null. All other results show the statistical presence of the effects of absolute motion. This motion fits the COBE CBR dipole-fit speed of 365 +/- 18 km/s. The Miller 1933 experiment analysis shows the solar inflow component to be 47 +/- 6 km/s, as compared to the (process physics) theoretical value of 42 km/s. Derivation of the calculations using the refractive index of air and He.
Miller assumed V = V(solar system) + V(earth orbital) and concluded that V = 210 km/s.
Process physics has a third term ...
V(Flow) = V(cosmic) + V(tangent) - V(solar_inflow) = 365 + 30 - 42 Note: In PP13 the full set of components is shown to include a 4th term being V(earth_inflow) being perpendicular to the interferometer (thus not identifiable) and earth's surface.
PP13 - Review of Process Physics
In this paper a consolidated summary and review is made in regard to the developments to-date presented and outlined in regard to Process Physics. Chapters 1 to 8 cover issues dealt with in PP_Papers numbered 1 to 7 (approximately). Chapter 9 deals with Quantum Foam Flow and Gravity, while chapter 10 reviews and re-analyses the published experimental data for many important experiments with the finding:
10.1 Space and Absolute Motion . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 10.2 Theory of the Michelson Interferometer . . . . . . . 53 10.3 The Michelson-Morley Experiment: 1887 . . . . . . . 57 10.4 The Miller Interferometer Experiment: 1925-1926 . . 61 10.5 Gravitational In-flow from the Miller Data . . . . . 65 10.6 The Illingworth Experiment: 1927 . . . . . . . . . . 68 10.7 The New Bedford Experiment: 1963 . . . . . . . . . . 69 10.8 The DeWitte Experiment: 1991 . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 10.9 The Torr-Kolen Experiment: 1981 . . . . . . . . . . 77 10.10 Galactic In-flow and the CMB Frame . . . . . . . . . 79 10.11 In-Flow Turbulence and Gravitational Waves . . . . . 80 10.12 Vacuum Michelson Interferometers . . . . . . . . . . 81 10.13 Solid-State Michelson Interferometers . . . . . . . 82 10.14 New Absolute Motion Detectors . . . . . . . . . . . 83 10.15 Absolute Motion and Quantum Gravity . . . . . . . .. 86 10.16 Gravitational Anomalies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .87 10.17 The Failure of the Einstein Postulates . . . . . . . 88 10.18 The Shankland Paper: 1955 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .92