Established Member
Also I think the theory is mature enough to be tested and will only make the derived publication convincing.Originally Posted by philippeb8
If I publish the theory in another 5 years then chances are it will get lost for another 50 years in the archives.
It’s like a chicken and egg problem. But I prefer the former alternative.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Order of Kilopi
My bold. Importance is in the eyes of the beholder. The burden remains on you to convince someone that it is important enough to justify a suitable mission that the person or institution in question is capable of financing and launching.
Established Member
Yes, that’s what it comes down to.
But this time I have some professional help and the Return Of Investment (ROI) makes it that important.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Order of Kilopi
I'm not at all sure that that is true. One of the missions of CASIS is to promote STEM education, so essentially PR work can be one of their activities. There are these things like high school projects selected to go onto the ISS, and it's not necessarily for hard science but to get young people interested in science. And I think I advised Phillipe from the outset that going through that kind of channel would probably be much more productive than trying to go the academic route. I would find it easy to justify, "we know that light travels at the same speed, but we have never tested it in space." They will teach people about interferometers and Einstein, so why not.
As above, so below
Order of Kilopi
Except I think it would be more accurate to say there have been various kinds of tests of the speed of light in space, but what might be more of an issue are the limitations of the various tests, and whether a different proposed test would have some unique properties that would make it worthwhile.
Again, depending on the nature of any proposed test (which we shouldn't get into here). On the subject of interferometers, though, I wonder what can be said based on, for instance, LISA Pathfinder? The full LISA project would probably have much more to say on the subject, but unfortunately, we'll have to wait until the 2030s for that.They will teach people about interferometers and Einstein, so why not.
"The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is hard to verify their authenticity." — Abraham Lincoln
I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?
The Leif Ericson Cruiser
Order of Kilopi
I assume you submitted a proposal via their website (https://www.issnationallab.org/resea...s/proposals/)? Did they tell you what the evaluation score was for your submission? Have they confirmed that is has been accepted?
Are you saying they have the things in your list specifically for your theory or this is just what they do for any (accepted) submissions?
What does "pre-approve a theory" mean?
Established Member
- Their website had technical problems so I contacted them directly and filled up an official form
- I do not know the exact score but apparently only high scores will benefit from their sponsorship and venture capitalist support and that’s what happens in my case
- I am at the feasibility stage already so that confirms the theory is pre-approved
- By the “things” you mean the apparatus? No they don’t have it and it needs to be purchased for $100k, hence the need for funding
- “Pre-approved” means the theory was reviewed by a small group of scientists and it was found to be mature enough to be tested
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Moderator
This doesn't make any sense to me. Theories aren't "approved" and they certainly aren't "pre-approved", and a governmental (or semi-governmental) agency isn't going to do it.
I suspect what is actually pre-approved is your proposed experiment. But even if they approve your experiment, it doesn't mean your theory is approved. It is quite possible that the experiment will completely disprove your theory, that's why the experiment is being done.
Established Member
Maybe they don’t care about the theory but the experiment is manifold:
- It can find SR to be right thus the theory to be wrong
- It can find SR to be wrong and the theory to be wrong also
- It can find SR to be wrong and the theory to be right
But the economic benefits of the latter case it too great to be dismissed (we’ll make “Starfleet” a reality).
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Order of Kilopi
Actually you are trying to bypass the peer review to establish the credibility of your theory that this thread is about. It is that which massively lowers the chances of your CASIS proposal succeeding. They are not going to spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to send an unsupported experiment from a random person to the ISS. Experiments based on peer reviewed science from scientists and companies will go up before your experiment.
Order of Kilopi
This is a good point. Forget about the unverified theory behind the experiment. CASIS may send it up to the ISS as an educational tool using standard apparatus to demonstrate relativity.
Established Member
US taxpayers aren’t going to pay for it but corporations who are willing to take advantage of the momentum to be “noticed”.
Like I said before the experiment needs to be done before I publish the results so that it is more credible.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Order of Kilopi
The "theory is pre-approved" mistake again. You have no evidence that anyone looked at your theory or "pre-approved" it. A feasibility stage suggests is that there is no reason to reject the experiment based on the proposal and now they can look at whether it can be sent to and can be done at the ISS. They will be asking whether the apparatus can survive the g-forces of launch, whether they will work in micro-gravity, what instructions will the astronauts need, how to return the data, etc.
The Proposal Submission Process
• Scientific and technical merit, to justify the use of the space station as a research platform.
• Operational feasibility, to ensure the project can be conducted safely and effectively on station.
• Funding commitments and requests, to ensure the project can be completed with defined resources.
• Potential economic and commercial impact, to assess resulting value to the American taxpayer.
Established Member
Well the “scientific and technical merit” is the pre-approval I am referring to.
Please stay tuned for tomorrow’s decision.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Order of Kilopi
You missed the point.
First your proposal has to be valid enough that CASIS will accept it as in The Proposal Submission Process which however does not list educational merit. The lack of peer review for your theory makes this success unlikely.
Next you have to get funding. Taxpayers might pay for an unsupported experiment for educational purposes. Corporations are much less interested because they want profits. They do not want to be"noticed" by their stockholders for risking their money. An experiment vastly unlikely to produce anything but the expected results is a high risk venture. Remember that special relativity works and the stockholders will know this!
Order of Kilopi
How do you know that the scientific and technical merit of your experiment (not your theory) has been approved when you do not know the decision yet?
Established Member
- They said they will help me out get sponsorship and only those with high scores have that privilege.
- I’ve been “ghosted” multiple times in the past but now they do follow up.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Order of Kilopi
It may be that you are misunderstanding them. You wrote that a decision will be made tomorrow. This post implies that a decision has been made. This sounds like a general statement that once a proposal has been scored, they will help proposals with high scores to get sponsorship.
Easily resolved though, philippeb8: What is your score? Please give a reference to the score level needed for sponsorship help.
Established Member
Sorry I didn’t explain correctly. The first stage approves the second. The second stage approves the third. And so on.
Right now I’m just at the “first stage approves the second” step. I will let you know if I am able to get approved for the next step.
Also I’ll ask them my score or my grade and I’ll let you know as well when I get an answer.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Order of Kilopi
Thanks for clarifying that you do not know your score and thus you have no idea whether you will get help to be sponsored. The vagueness of "stage after stage " suggests that not even the scientific and technical merit of your experiment has been evaluated yet. Your score should be a result of evaluating all aspects of the experiment.
The Proposal Submission Process is the online process but you say you could not submit using that web site.
Have you got past the "Upon requesting a copy of these guidelines, an ISS National Lab team member will contact you to discuss your project idea(s)." stage?
Last edited by Reality Check; 2019-Feb-08 at 03:43 AM.
Established Member
Of course; we’ve been exchanging emails for the last 2 weeks. Now I will talk directly to somebody tomorrow to discuss the feasibility of the experiment.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Established Member
So they haven’t graded it yet because they’re worrying about legal issues. So:
- They might talk to the Canadian Space Agency (CSA) to pass it on
- I might need a US citizen with a better understanding of the subject
- They might talk directly to PetersCreek or tusenfem
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Last edited by philippeb8; 2019-Feb-08 at 07:06 PM.
Order of Kilopi
You have not even submitted your proposal so the "preapproval" stuff is wrong. You arc a standard pre-submission filtering stage.
Last edited by Reality Check; 2019-Feb-10 at 07:41 PM.
Order of Kilopi
The Proposal Submission Process is clear that "The ISS National Lab will not consider proposals received from a non-U.S. person as defined in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)". It looks like you need to get around that, e.g. a US citizen submits the proposal for you.
Established Member
It’s more than that because the Principal Investigator (PI) needs to be in the US as well. So I might have to move back to the US myself.
Luckily my employer got offices in the US so I can ask to be transferred easily. They’ll let me know the next step soon...
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Established Member
Ok good news: I found a US citizen and physicist willing to be the PI.
I believe only Shaula and Reality Check understand the whole theory but they are not US citizen and the experiment being a subset of the whole theory can be easily understood by any physicist.
So anyway it is officially submitted now and I am waiting for an official approval.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Order of Kilopi
What you have is a PI who is only aware of the experiment and not as Shaula and Reality Check understand inspired by an invalid, unpublished theory (an ATM idea so we cannot discuss it here). The experiment is not "a subset of the whole theory". The experiment is basically the mainstream Mickelson-Morley experiment. The change is that you want to be done on the ISS. The Mickelson-Morley experiment is understood by undergraduate physics students and so of course easily understood by any physicist. The complexities here are designing the experiment to be launched to and run at the ISS.
Established Member
There are theoretical differences with MM I cannot discuss here but like I said before having followed the academic way I would have to wait another 50 years, if even possible to publish it at all, and by that time the ISS would have been long gone.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Order of Kilopi
The academic way is to produce scientific theories that can convince other scientists that the theory is correct. There is informal peer review of the theory. The theory is discussed with colleagues. The theory is presented at conferences. Then the theory is submitted to a journal where there is official peer review to see if it is good enough to be published. A published theory is then peer reviewed throughout its life by scientist reading the paper. If you had followed the academic way, your theory would already be published!
You may not even need the ISS or any replacement stations. If your experiment was valid enough then it could be launched stand alone in a satellite.
Established Member
I’m not sure I could publish it so easily because the theory encompasses the equivalent of 5 other PhD studies.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Posting Permissions
