Science has made lots of progress without knowledge of my model of our Universe. I suppose science will continue making progress without this knowledge. Science made progress when almost everyone thought the earth was flat and the sun went around the earth. The people who tried to change this thinking had to suffer a lot of criticism.
John R -----Original Message----- From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Russell Standish Sent: Friday, June 06, 2014 9:18 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: TRONNIES - SPACE On Sat, Jun 07, 2014 at 01:04:51PM +1200, LizR wrote: > > To be honest the alpha particle is treated in the book. (At least I > think it is. My head may have exploded when I tried to follow the Ross > Model too > far.) I just John Ross's word for it that he hasn't treated the alpha particle. He also reiterated that in a subsequent email on this thread. > > > > > Apparently in Ross's book is an "integration" around the tronnie's > > orbit, which turns a 1/r^2 into a 1/r. Well that looks like a > > regular integration of a force into a potential - but that's not > > right as the transcendental solutions mentioned above do not form a continuum. > > > > I kind of lost interest at that point. It seems there is nothing to > > see here. A rather dubious set of propositions, leading to an > > intractable theory that provides no insight, and indeed would appear > > to be falsified by strongly supported empirical laws (such as the > > various conservation laws we've all mentioned). > > > > You could ask Mr R to send you a copy of his book and spend a few > minutes leafing through it, which I suspect will confirm you views > (but he thinks will convert you). No thanks. I'm not interested enough in these questions to bother picking through what will probably be a quite irrelevant mathematical model. I haven't looked at any of this stuff since I studied nuclear physics at uni more than 30 years ago now. I've posted occasional stuff to this thread where I thought it might be helpful - such as raising the issue of lepton number conservation, but I really don't feel it is my duty to thoroughly debunk the Ross model. To be quite honest, John Ross is trying to convince the wrong guys. He should be trying to convince someone at the Perimeter institute perhaps, or even the editor of a journal like Phys Rev might be a suitable first step. But I suspect maybe he has already tried, and hasn't convinced them. Cheers -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au Latest project: The Amoeba's Secret (http://www.hpcoders.com.au/AmoebasSecret.html) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
