Stefan--
You suggest that Pauli may enter Kim’s idea. How do you consider that spin coupling enters the picture? Cooper pairing is generally considered a real physical condition. Bob Sent from Windows Mail From: Stefan Israelsson Tampe Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2014 11:37 AM To: [email protected] Over fitting was my feeling when reading about Kim et al. On the other hand if you can make use of first principles and simulate a collision that would be great for understanding of what happens in a collision. Of cause assuming that QED is good enough to model the electrodynamic stage of the collision. I have on the other side never seen QED validated in a three body example like He or such so until anyone can fill that gap I would be a little scared even to trust QED. Of cause doing such a simulation is probably insanely difficult, or? My problem is that I didn't get any physical understanding reading the paper (I could follow the math) just the usual summary statement that it is a shielding, but how? I want to understand the physics, and if the physical understanding is not there you can create great complex earth centric models that does not help anybody else but professors with a head the size of a huge pumpkin, in stead of a nice slim heliocentric model that enable some serious engineering to be done. Cheers! On a side note, maybe the pauli principle could be the force that pushed the electron and keep a shield, in that case orientation should be important no? and a good continuation of those experiments is to try varying the orientations if possible. Cheers! On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 7:22 PM, James Bowery <[email protected]> wrote: On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 9:44 AM, Stefan Israelsson Tampe <[email protected]> wrote: The fundamental paper Kim et all i basing his theory on is in a sense interesting and can be a reality, but I did only see that they manage to fit the model to the data, not really a proof of that the model explain the phenomena, or am I wrong? What is the general thought here have we got this result explained or is there more to do? When refining a model based on experiment it is obviously necessary to do follow up experiments to test the refined model otherwise one is merely engaged in the pejorative sense of "data mining" aka over-fitting.
