Since one of the goals of this group is to create an Interdiscipline
Synthesis Cosmology (ISC), where acceptance of Tachyonics as valid is
the fundamental initial assumption, and I have declared that the
search for the tachyon and the search for the quanta of gravity are
one and the same search, then we have come to a point at which
something must be done to substantiate that assertion experimentally,
which would rightly be viewed as an issue for our sister group, The
TEPG. Yet, help is needed to accomplish this feat.

I shall explain, as follows.

The overall goal of The TEPG is to find ways to detect and use
tachyons. And one area of research that has been proposed as a
possible fruitful field is gravitation detection, because it is
possible that the quanta of gravity are tachyonic.

Yet, such a concept, currently only an hypothesis, must eventually be
substantiated with experimental evidence, in order to be accepted by
the physics community as maturing from a mere science-fiction idea to
growing into a genuine testable "theory" of gravity.

As you will have noticed if you do a lot of research into gravity
theory, the mainstream position on the most advanced astronomical
research going on gravitation these days is associated with the
measurement of electromagnetic radiation from binary pulsar systems -
such as PSR 1913+16, discovered by Russel Hulse and Joseph Taylor in
the 1974, and for which discovery these men later won the Nobel Prize.

How the detection of such radiation is connected to gravity theory is
that there seems to be a reduction in the rotational energy of some of
these systems, and the energy that is lost is said to be carried off
by gravitational radiation, in the form of gravitational waves
propagating outward into the universe at large.

The search is on, therefore, for gravitational waves. However, many
astronomers and other scientists insist that the data collected in the
observations of such binary pulsar systems can be used to calculate
the speed of these waves, and what is more, some physicists claim the
speed of the gravitational waves is also the speed of the quanta of
gravity; usually referencing the standard quadrupole model, in which
the quantum is the graviton (a spin-2, massless, intermediate vector
boson), which is assumed to travel at lightspeed.

Consequently, since certain "predictions" that have been made using
the data collected in binary pulsar observations have been tested,
and are said to confirm the mainstream position, then it is asserted
that any other gravity theory must conform to that position, or it
must also be able to make other predictions that can likewise be
confirmed using the same data. That is, they link their calculations
using the data to the standard model of gravity (General Relativity
combined with the spin-2 graviton model), and say that any
alternative theory of gravity must be compared to that theory, if it
is to be viewed as valid experimentally.

Put bluntly, they demand that any challenge to the graviton model must
be able to explain the energy loss in the said binary pulsar systems.

I personally consider this demand unqualified, for a number of good
and logical reasons (which I have explained elsewhere). But I find
that so many physicists throw up the binary pulsar data as proof
against my ideas on tachyonic gravity that it must be confronted head-
on, if the graviton model is to be rejected in favor of the tachyonic
model that I explain in my thesis. [To review the thesis, click-
on "Tachyonic Gravity" at www.TachyonicsSociety.com.]

In a recent discussion at the Advanced Physics Forum, an opponent of
my thesis has declared that I must present equations by which numbers
can be calculated that explain or correlate with the data, or from
which predictions can be made that will be confirmed by the data,
before he will take my ideas seriously. And since, as I have found,
his stance is representative of that of most mainstream physicists,
then I have taken it as a mandate to address the challenge that he
has presented to me; to produce numbers that can be used to plot a
line that fits with the binary pulsar data; which means that I must
thereby "prove" that the currently prevailing interpretations of the
data, as supporting the graviton model, is mostly wrong.

So, while I have already confirmed for myself that my thesis is quite
consistent with the data, though it does not directly contradict the
graviton model, as I see the situation, it has now been put upon me to
discredit the graviton model before I will even be allowed, in the
mainstream view, to demonstrate that my version of tachyonic gravity
is a more accurate interpretation of the data.

Thus, I seek numerical calculations from my tachyonic gravity model
that result in values that can be checked against the said data, and,
at the same time, I must be able to disprove the graviton model.

Now, I have already uncovered a number of serious defects in the said
graviton model, and in the "calculations" using the binary pulsar data
that are said to support that model. Enough, indeed, to discredit the
claim that the data "prove" that the graviton model is correct. But I
do not have alternative calculations to propose.

I am, of course, working on it, but have only spare time to spend;
having to earn a living at a job that is not related to this project.
So, any help on this particular challenge would be greatly
appreciated.

Thanks