Rules governing qm view challenge and $20000 prize

1. The prize will be awarded to the first person (or group) who submits a written report/claim that shows why the qm view is NOT more plausible^[a] than the law of light speed, c, and theory based on this law.  The report/claim is to be submitted to a small, independent committee that will decide^[b] if it shows that the qm view is not more plausible.  The committee will include members with backgrounds in physics, mathematics, and philosophy of science. It will issue a decision/report explaining the evidence and reasons for its decision. All reports will be available at the qm view website. If and when the prize is won, the committee will pay the winner from the escrow account for this purpose, and the winner will be announced.^[c]

2. The committee will review report/claims in the order received and will issue a decision/report within 60 days. If a decision is expected to take longer than 60 days, the submitter will be notified of the expected delay.

3. To discourage frivolous or ill conceived claims and to help defray the committee's cost of reaching a decision and issuing a report, all submitted reports/claims must include a $4000 submission fee payable to "qm view challenge fund." In the event that a claim is accepted, the submission fee will be returned with the prize.

4. It is possible to avoid or postpone the submission fee by submitting the report/claim via email to the qm view website for a preliminary analysis and recommendation (which is likely to take less than 30 days). This does not preclude submitting the report/claim to the committee should the preliminary recommendation be rejection of the claim.^[d]

5. An objective of the challenge and prize is to accelerate the evolution of the qm view project and reward anyone able to make a substantial contribution to this evolution (whether the contribution advances the project or terminates it). Therefore, at the discretion of the committee, separate awards will also be made for reports that result in substantial advancements of the qm view.^[e]

6. The qm view challenge and prize is open to anyone or any group.

7. These rules are subject to change in order to better meet the objectives of the qm view challenge and prize. If and when the rules change, the changes will appear on this web page.

[a] The plausibility of a theory is understood to depend on the plausibility of its premises, the plausibility of the consequences of the premises, the ability to predict a wide variety of natural phenomena and experimental results, the accuracy of the predictions, the ability to explain logical physical causes for the phenomena it predicts, its simplicity, and its consilience with related plausible theory. The table below shows why we conclude that the qm view is far more plausible than relativity theory. Others may disagree due to different knowledge and awareness of the related evidence. Perhaps someone can find evidence that results in red in the qm view column (which is a reason for this challenge and prize).

[b] We are trying to make the decision process as objective as possible by creating a committee comprised of impartial people who can understand the evidence bearing on the plausibilities of the theories before reaching tentative conclusions that can be changed by additional evidence and reasoning. Further information about the decision process and rules governing the prize is available here.

[c] The announcement and reasons for awarding the prize will be made on the qm view website along with the committee's report, including the plausibilities determined for the qm view and relativity theory. If this system for grading theories helps people distinguish between realistic and unrealistic theories it might be useful elsewhere.

[d] Over the course of the qm view project people have proposed various reasons why the qm view might be flawed. To date, all of the reasons have been unfounded, and generally due to misunderstanding the qm view. As one becomes familiar with the qm view there will be aspects that do not seem correct (e.g. objects that are virtually round but really oval, and bodies that shrink and lose mass as they approach massive bodies) but we think people will find that these effects agree with the scientific evidence. There will be many opportunities to look for flaws and discover other things about the qm view.

[e] For example, a major contribution would be a report describing a practical method for determining the direction and magnitude of the sun's velocity through the quantum medium. Devising a method sounds easy until one tries. A report shedding light on the consistency or inconsistency between the qm view and quantum mechanics would be helpful. The qm view has a bearing on a broad range of phenomena and theory (e.g. cosmological red shift and dark mass/energy) where contributions might be possible.
 

CRITERIA	qm view	relativity theory
realistic premises	A medium in which quanta of energy and matter exist is plausible (per Dirac and others) and a medium was widely accepted until Michelson-Morley and relativity theory appeared to preclude it.	Relativity theory is the result of assuming constant light speed, c, which cannot be explained by orthodox physics. The qm view shows why the illusion of constant light speed, c, is a logical effect of the qm.
realistic consequences of the premises	No consequences have yet been found that are impossible or otherwise unrealistic.	The consequences include observations that we can prove are wrong and scenarios that are impossible (e.g. traveling back in time and making our birth impossible).
variety of phenomena predicted	Predicts wide variety including light speed, c, inertia, centrifugal forces and zero rotation frames, gravity, real and virtual "relativistic" phenomena, and the huge internal energy of matter.	Predicts observed "relativistic" and gravitational phenomena.
accuracy of predictions	good (essentially same as relativity)	good (essentially same as qm view)
ability to explain the causes of the predicted phenomena	Explains logical physical causes for all the phenomena it predicts.	Does not explain physical causes for the phenomena it predicts.
simplicity	Intuitively logical theory with simple equations but complex consequences of the premises and equations. The real and virtual phenomena of the qm view are obscured by relativity theory.	Simple in that a medium is unnecessary but complicated in that it requires a counter-intuitive spacetime system where observers moving relative to one another have different standards of time, distance, and mass.
consilience with other theory	Consistent with Newtonian and Galilean physics, Doppler shift theory, and possible fit with quantum mechanics and quantum vacuum.	Inconsistent with universal standards of time, distance, and mass of classical physics, and with Doppler shift theory and quantum mechanics.