http://www.mufon-ces.org/docs/heimphysics.abstract.pdf * generating gravitational fields, * producing gravitational waves * lowering inertia * superluminal velocity. *wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heim_Theory
Heim theory has several problems; see this list http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Heim_theory/Archive2#Arguments_contra_HT it has never been peer-reviewed, and is probably an example of fudged science- that is, the results are derived from equations which in turn were derived from the desired results; it doesn't seem to predict anything that wasn't already in the data the theory is derived from. That is the most telling aspect to this story; Heim tailored his theory to fit his preconceptions and desires, not to reflect the real world. That isn't really the scientific way, I suspect.
thing is his mass theorem predicts masses of many quantum particles that have not been discovered at his time.
Perhaps the most telling comment on the page I referenced is this one, from John Reid himself. The innermost workings of this theory seem to be buried in obfuscation, which is not a good thing.
and than John Reid states that the mass values of quantum particles are still capable of being derived without the use of the A matrix.
In fact it is Heim's theory that is the reason there are concepts such as: Helicon Double Layer Thruster engine, NASA VASIMR concept, ANU HDLT. All these are branches from his studies and are engines employed in space, ion engines.
No, Heim's theory has had nothing to do with the development of VASIMR, the Helicon Double Layer Thruster engine or any other ion engine. Where did you get that idea?
I followed Heim Theory which led me to the published article in AIAA in 2005...with the most destinguishable paper for future space travel...which led me to the name of the person who decided to test Heim theory in one of the NASA facilities...I than searched his name and found him to be sponsoring one of the projects which as VASIMR and HDLT... I mean I guess I went a bit too far here...his sponsorship in VASIMR probably has nothing to do with the Heim theory....but magnetic field study involved in both...
I voted other because I do not know enough to critique his theory. After checking a few articles via Google search, the following seem pertinent. Neither he nor his supporters spend much if any effort on claims that other theories are wrong. One of the hallmarks of the crackpot is a lot of effort spent debunking mainstream and/or alternative theories. This is a plus for Heim. It is hard to imagine that Heim and his collaborators have made some great advance in the absence of supporters from mainstream physics. Perhaps it is similar to String Theory: Reasonable and self consistent, but not really usable. As mentioned above, I do not know enough to judge the merits of Heim theory or the lack of any merit.
