Yes, you can suppress the new growth for a long time. Oaks actually do this, and deliberately stunt the growth of the seedlings, to prevent them from challenging the old growth for supremacy. But eventually the old oaks die, and the seedlings, by now typically 100 years old, grow rapidly to fill the void.

]]>Yes, that’s correct. I noticed it but didn’t have the energy to correct it – sorry!

]]>For some reason thinking for yourself, outside the box allowed by university authorities, academic peer review networks and government sponsored funding agencies (or the historical equivalent authorities such as the church) has always been something to stamp out and discourage, rather than to be nurtured to see if a great oak grows from self-selecting diverse set of initially weak seedlings.

]]>I think it may be the Lamb shift, which is 1/10 of what you get from the fine structure. The fine structure already explains the anomalous magnetic moments much more accurately than this, and the standard model includes a .4% correction for the muon to bring it into line with my prediction for the correction necessary due to the quantum gravity of Jupiter. The Lamb shift is supposed to arise from vacuum fluctuations, but this is a cop-out. It arises from the quantum gravitational field of all the rest of the Solar System that hasn’t yet been accounted for. If you want to call that vacuum fluctuations, you can, but that is an aether theory, not a relativistic theory. These `vacuum fluctuations’ are just neutrinos, so why not call them neutrinos?

]]>Let me say again – spacetime was *built* by the dwarves – it wasn’t there to begin with – they invented it. They made a Big Bang to create spacetime – but the Big Bang is an invention – a very clever invention, but an invention nonetheless. The trouble with modern physics, though, is that the clever and inventive dwarves have been driven out of the Mines of Moria – to be replaced by orcs looking for dark matter that isn’t there.

]]>Much the same goes for the path integral. It always seemed insanely complicated, and I never made any serious attempt to understand it properly. But now I see where the path integral arises in my model, and why it is necessary in QFT. It is necessary because there is a basic misunderstanding of what the wavefunction is. It is not necessary in my model, because the wavefunction is not fundamental, it is a derived concept, and is completely unnecessary for doing calculations in my model.

The path integral is used in QFT because QFT has no idea where any particle is in any frame of reference, ever. Therefore it has to look for it everywhere in the universe at once.

]]>Yes, the fine structure constant is dimensionless. It arises in my model as a ratio of two angular velocities – the orbital angular velocity of the Moon around the Earth, and the orbital angular velocity of the Earth around the Sun – but as vector (cross) product, not the scalar (dot) product that appears in modified inertia in MOND.

Physicists will say these angular velocities are ridiculously small to have any effect on anything. But then they have forgotten to renormalize! I never really understood how renormalization worked until a few days ago, when I saw it happening in front of my eyes. So now I understand how it works, and why it is needed in QFT. And I think I also understand why GR is not renormalizable – it is because the gauge group isn’t compact. So that is why it is so important that my quantum gravity is renormalizable – which it is.

Most interpretations of relativity (both special and general) are based on the assumption that spacetime exists. It doesn’t. Einstein never assumed that spacetime exists. What exists are coordinates for every observer’s perceptions of spacetime. Renormalisation enables you to transform between the coordinate systems of different observers. Relativity tries to do the same. But you have to choose one method for doing this, you can’t use two different methods at the same time. And whatever you do, do not make the mistake of believing that the spacetime we see around us is real. We do not see spacetime, we see things, and we use mathematics to tell us where those things are, and how they are going to affect us. Spacetime is no more real than the wavefunction, but it is equally useful.

]]>