Re: Thomson Aether Physics Under Scrutiny
From: Creighton Hogg (wchogg_at_hep.wisc.edu)
Date: 12/26/04
- Next message: Creighton Hogg: "Re: Secrets of the Aether"
- Previous message: FrediFizzx: "Re: Nobel Prize for David Thomson?!"
- In reply to: Sam Wormley: "Re: Thomson Aether Physics Under Scrutiny"
- Next in thread: David Thomson: "Re: Thomson Aether Physics Under Scrutiny"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 20:59:13 -0600
On Sun, 26 Dec 2004, Sam Wormley wrote:
> David Thomson wrote:
> >
> > In my book, I clearly show the relative strengths of the forces using simple
> > force laws.
> >
> > As for the graphics, it is another sign of failure for the Standard Model
> > and SRT that its concepts cannot be accurately graphically represented. My
> > graphics are all based on parameters derived directly from the subatomic
> > particles themselves.
> >
> >
> >>Pictures, Java Applets, GUI chazzerei are ka ka. Proofs require
> >>mathematics. Do you deliver?
> >
> >
> > Of course I do, Bob. That's what's so sensational about the book. It's not
> > just a philosophy, although it lends itself well to philosophical
> > development. The book is about an entirely fresh perspective of physics,
> > based on the same empirical data of the Standard Model, but presenting a far
> > more coherent interpretation using a complete set of simple algebraic
> > equations. All the equations maintain their dimensions all throughout.
> >
> > In the past, you guys could trash me and it would bother me. But now I have
> > PhD physicists reading the book and agreeing that I'm on to something. I'm
> > presently working with a biofeedback equipment company to design probes that
> > will directly test my theories concerning the neurosciences. The book makes
> > so much sense to people that I have had one publishing company provide all
> > the editing services for free and now another publisher wants to publish the
> > book in perfect bound form.
> >
> > You can insult me all you want. I'm just laughing at you guys. Careful,
> > you're on Candid Camera. The world will be referred to the cowboys on this
> > list as a clear example of the maniacal nature scientists have taken in
> > order to defend their weak theories.
> The neutron is a uud and can decay with final products of udd plus
> an electron and anti neutrino v_e (bar). Thomson should read the
> empirical research that the standard model is built upon.
There's nothing on his website that indicated he could replicate all the
data of QCD. I'm still waiting for someone to explain all the DIS data,
bjorken scaling, parton distribution function measurments, jets,
confinement, hadronization, etc. quantitatively. Also, nothing on his
website looked like it addressed the different runnings of the coupling
constants for QCD and QED.
- Next message: Creighton Hogg: "Re: Secrets of the Aether"
- Previous message: FrediFizzx: "Re: Nobel Prize for David Thomson?!"
- In reply to: Sam Wormley: "Re: Thomson Aether Physics Under Scrutiny"
- Next in thread: David Thomson: "Re: Thomson Aether Physics Under Scrutiny"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
