Re: Help with paper.
- From: Sam Wormley <swormley1@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 18:31:35 GMT
On Aug 24, 12:53 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:Peter wrote:On Aug 24, 12:34 pm, Uncle Al <Uncle...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:Actually, Uncle Al, made valid points. It is the mark of a true crankPeter wrote:You are wrong. Sorry.Hi! I wrote a paper about an unexpected finding I made in physics thatZero point fluctuations.
started with the simple concept that all activity requires energy.
submitted this paper to a journal, but it was rejected, not because it
was considered to be wrong, but because, they said, it required
extensive revision and editing.
It was wrong.
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/lajos.htm#a2
to assume you can't be wrong. Al just pointed you a contradiction to
your thesis. Fix it!- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
How can you assert something on a paper you haven't read?
You said that "all activity requires energy" and that is contradicted
by observation. Electrons in atoms don't use up energy. Uncle Al's
pointing out "Zero point fluctuations" is another contradiction to
your statement of which you claim is a basis of your paper.
Post your paper and (most likely) watch it get "ripped to sheds",
probably for the same reasons it was rejected. That's what peer review
is all about--finding the mistakes and allowing the author to improve