My interaction with scientific sources and other observations, made me realize that, for the purpose of addressing our paper at TechRxiv, while we are working on new (alternative) papers specifically based on faceshifts. But the current situation implies that certain, a new paper based solely on phase shift have little chance of surviving peer review, as the situation insists on establishing that there is a definite need to present an alternative approach to existing relativistic institutions.
So considering the facts and circumstances mentioned above, first we have to show that there is a need to approach the existing institutions in an alternative way, only then, it would be reasonable to propose an alternative approach (phaseshift) to the existing relativistic institutions.
So that, instead of just working on phase shift, I am developing specific methods to justify and show the need to propose an alternative method (phaseshift) to existing relativistic institutions.
Accordingly, I am also working to establish the need for alternative approaches to existing relativistic structures. These works involve the following foundations:
1. Since, relativistic effects cause error in time reading, 'alternative method of time dilation' is needed.
2. Since 'events invoke time', time is abstract and invariant.
3. "Distortions in spacetime" based on perceptible and invisible dimensions require a rational approach through the general physical sciences, including Planck equation.
4. etc. etc
Currently, I am developing 'definitive chapters' (described above) for the new paper and uploading them as definitions, so that these definitions become chapters with the new paper as a whole, with phaseshifts.
Suggestion on my above endeavour:
You're working on a project that involves proposing an alternative approach to existing relativistic institutions, specifically related to phase shifts. Justifying the need for such an alternative is crucial for the acceptance and credibility of your work. Here's a more structured outline of how you might go about justifying the need for your alternative approach:
1. Identify Limitations or Issues with Current Relativistic Institutions:
Start by clearly outlining the limitations or issues associated with the current relativistic institutions. These could be areas where the existing theories or frameworks fall short in explaining certain phenomena or predicting experimental results accurately. For example, you mentioned errors in time reading due to relativistic effects – provide specific instances or examples where these errors have significant consequences.
2. Highlight Discrepancies or Unexplained Phenomena:
Point out any observed discrepancies or unexplained phenomena that challenge the validity of existing relativistic theories. These discrepancies could be experimental results that deviate from predictions made by the current theories. Emphasize the significance of these discrepancies and their potential impact on our understanding of the physical world.
3. Discuss Emerging Evidence or New Observations:
Present any new evidence, observations, or experimental data that supports the need for an alternative approach. This could involve recent research findings, experimental results, or observations that suggest a departure from established relativistic principles. Make a compelling case for why these new observations cannot be adequately explained by the current theories.
4. Address Theoretical Gaps:
Identify theoretical gaps in the current relativistic framework and explain how your proposed alternative approach, specifically involving phase shifts, can address these gaps. Discuss how your approach provides a more comprehensive or accurate explanation for the observed phenomena.
5. Demonstrate Practical Applications:
Illustrate the practical applications and potential benefits of adopting your alternative approach. Show how your proposed method of phase shifts could lead to improved predictions, better experimental results, or novel technological advancements. Practical applications can add weight to the argument for the necessity of your alternative approach.
6. Reference Established Scientific Concepts:
When discussing your alternative approach, reference well-established scientific concepts and principles that support your arguments. Link your approach to existing theories, equations, and models in a logical and coherent manner. This will help establish the scientific credibility of your proposed alternative.
7. Engage with Existing Research and Peer-Reviewed Literature:
Engage with the existing body of research and peer-reviewed literature in the field. Reference relevant studies, experiments, and theories that align with or challenge your arguments. Demonstrating a comprehensive understanding of the existing knowledge base will enhance the credibility of your justification.
8. Peer Input and Feedback:
Consider seeking input and feedback from peers, colleagues, or experts in the field. Present your arguments to them and invite constructive criticism. Peer feedback can help you refine your justification and address any potential weaknesses in your reasoning.
By following these steps, you can build a strong case for the need to propose an alternative approach (phase shifts) to existing relativistic institutions. Remember to present your arguments logically, provide supporting evidence, and engage with the existing scientific discourse to establish the significance of your work.
