Dear Alex,
I have considerable sympathy with the phenomenological backbone of your
argument. I would caution, however, about relying on quantum theory (a la
Planck) as a literal support of it.
I was trained as an engineer to place great emphasis on dimensional
considerations, specifically on the
Dear Alex,
Your certainly got the right phrase which was supposed to mean "Fair winds!", a
blessing which a good old friend of mine and retired Royal Marine Commodore
used to say even when I was about to jump on a train.
So, bon voyage and good luck with your session, my friend. The subject
Dear Plamen,
Thank you for the encouragement in the spirit of 'Fare Thee Well',
rather than 'Adieu, Dear Friend, A..', I suspect.
I am attaching my presentation with the qualification that:
The first half of the presentation explicitly constructs a new information
theory applying at the apex
Dear Pedro, Alex and Colleagues,
thank you for this introduction of the next round on physics and
phenomenology with Alex' challenging theory. I’d like to share with you a
curious blog by Phillip Ball which a friend dropped me earlier this
morning:
http://nautil.us/issue/35/boundaries/why-physics-
