Re: Attention Professional Physicists with Courage
From: Pmb (someone_at_somewhere.com)
Date: 12/13/04
- Next message: robert j. kolker: "Re: physical significance"
- Previous message: tj Frazir: "Re: Rotational <-> Linear Inertia, Repulsive Gravity"
- Maybe in reply to: Uncle Al: "Re: Attention Professional Physicists with Courage"
- Next in thread: Eugene Shubert: "Re: Attention Professional Physicists with Courage"
- Reply: Eugene Shubert: "Re: Attention Professional Physicists with Courage"
- Reply: Eugene Shubert: "Re: Attention Professional Physicists with Courage"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 15:00:45 -0500
"Eugene Shubert" <GalileoProject002@everythingimportant.org> wrote in
message news:1102962544.919070.83420@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> I'm looking for a few professional physicists who aren't afraid of
> sticking their neck out. If you have courage to address concepts in
> mathematical physics, then speak up.
>
> The defining paragraph to my unique approach to special relativity is
> in the last paragraph of my abstract:
>
> "This paper demonstrates that for any two inertial frames of
> reference in either a Galilean or Einsteinian universe, clocks
> can be reset thereby modifying the usual transformation equations
> into a Lorentz transformation with a new arbitrary constant c.
> This trick is exploited to derive the Lorentz transformation
> from the Galilean transformation."
>
> Do you find preceding paragraph, which appears in the current December
> 10, 2004 edition of my paper, scientifically possible or impossible? If
> you believe that its meaning is not clear to you or if you believe that
> the meaning is clear and mathematically impossible, then, for the
> record, please state your complete real name and the university that
> awarded you your Ph.D.
>
> If you say that my thesis is correct but that I made a mistake in logic
> or mathematics, likewise, please specify your real name, the university
> that awarded you a Ph.D. and identify the first erroneous paragraph or
> equation in the thesis.
I can tell you right now that just the way that you phrased this letter
would make a PhD not want to respond to you. I guess you don't think that
diplomacy is something required/useful in science?
Pmb
- Next message: robert j. kolker: "Re: physical significance"
- Previous message: tj Frazir: "Re: Rotational <-> Linear Inertia, Repulsive Gravity"
- Maybe in reply to: Uncle Al: "Re: Attention Professional Physicists with Courage"
- Next in thread: Eugene Shubert: "Re: Attention Professional Physicists with Courage"
- Reply: Eugene Shubert: "Re: Attention Professional Physicists with Courage"
- Reply: Eugene Shubert: "Re: Attention Professional Physicists with Courage"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
