Fwd: [AIAS] Fwd: Restricting my Communication

by

 



Subject: Fwd: [AIAS] Fwd: Restricting my Communication
Date: Fri, 8 May 2009 11:09:18 EDT

I think that restricting communication is necessary in view of the amount of pseudoscience, I am not concerned at all about the attitudes of the old physics protagonists. Thanks for this comment by Rowlinson, to whom I regularly send e mail along with former Oxford colleagues.


Attachment: Rowlinson.bmp

I think we all understand your frustration Myron. The fact is, developing a unified field theory required a detailed and broad understanding of the various fields of science. You have not only developed a new theory, and a complete mastery of the mathematics that underlies it, but you have also developed a deep insight and overview of the physical processes that, within current understanding, seem to control natural behaviour. This has taken almost a lifetime of hard and meticulous study. Unfortunately, a lot, if not most, of mainstream physicists have not developed this same level of understanding and do not have the same in depth insight across the various fields of physics. They have usually become specialists in very narrow fields – a consequence of an educational system that channels students into specialised, but restrictive, areas of interest quite early on in their training. It is going to take the establishment a long time to catch up Myron – that is now very evident. All you can do is to carry on putting the basics in place across all the fields of physics (and assist in developing new devices to confirm the new predictions). As you say, we seem to have not only lost the ability to understand good theory but we have also become poorer at undertaking good and meaningful experiments. In fact, we have to wonder about some of the experimental claims in recent times (driven, as they have been, by flawed models and need to support them). New particles, cold fusion, black holes etc – a set of Hubble telescope pictures circulated by Stephen recently (tongue in cheek though it was) said it all! One thing that irritates me is that these outsiders seem to think that in AIAS we follow your line without question whatever the issues. This is nonsense, we hold different views on some very big questions. However, we agree on sound logic and what has been proven to be correct (by multiple cross checks, computer algebra, and sometimes common sense etc). Why do these people not question and reject the whole notion of negative energy, anti-particles, negative time etc – this never was part of our real world. Any way, just carry on with the good work Myron. Attached is the letter from John Rowlinson – will send others across one at a time, for your records, if this transmission is successful.

Best, Gareth

Date: Fri, 8 May 2009 05:18:15 -0400

Subject: [AIAS] Fwd: Restricting my Communication

–Forwarded Message Attachment–

Date: Fri, 8 May 2009 05:18:00 -0400
Subject: Restricting my Communication

I have decided to restrict my communication mainly to the AIAS / TGA working group and not to communicate with pseudoscientists, or with people who randomnly assert things without knowledge of mathematics. That is just a waste of everyone’s time. This includes standard theoretical physicists who still adhere to what is obviously an obsolete theory. I will still actively communicate with chemists and engineers and still act as a referee for mainline chemistry journals. I was originally a chemist and was forced into physics by the blank injustice of the EDCL years at Aberystwyth, an injustice which has become much worse by failure to put it right. I have taken the time to evaluate the various claims of latter day dogmatists and few stand up to scrutiny. In view of the essentially unanimous international acclaim for ECE theory, and in view of the mediaeval censoriousness of dogmatists I see no purpose in communicating with them, not that they ever do things directly. Also there is no purpose in communicating with people who fail to reproduce well known, undergraduate level, experiments, or do not show that their experiments are repeatable and reproducible. That can waste an awful lot of time, and it is a danger to apply a theory to incorrect data. The working group has been developed over years of hard work.

Civil List Scientist

_________________________________________________________________ View your Twitter and Flickr updates from one place ? Learn more! http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/137984870/direct/01/=

Advertisements

%d bloggers like this: