I did, I made an edit back in the beginning of October. It hasn't been reverted yet: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rydberg_matter&action=history
On Sun, Oct 25, 2015 at 7:58 AM, Eric Walker <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, Oct 25, 2015 at 9:28 AM, Blaze Spinnaker <[email protected] > > wrote: > > That's an interesting characterization considering it was Sveinn Ólafsson >> that did the presentation, that Holmlid has had a number of co-authors on >> his papers, that his university has published his press release(a rather >> risky thing to do, considering), and that he has had numerous peer reviewed >> papers published in respectable journals. >> >> I don't think we should confuse exceedingly talented >> and prodigious researcher for "one man show". >> > > Did you have a chance to read the details in the answer I linked to? > Holmlid wrote his own wikipedia page, which has been put up for deletion > (and rescued). And a large portion of the citations referring to him are > citations in other papers he has written. Apparently these are faux pas in > academia. > > For the sake of argument, set aside the question of whether what Holmlid > is describing is real. If you had 1000 dollars to bet on how much Holmlid > has the backing of the larger physics establishment, what odds would you > bet? :) > > This particular question is not one about fairness or truth; it's a > question about whether Holmlid is a maverick or not. I would personally > bet 1000 dollars on the possibility that he does not have the backing of > the larger physics establishment (if I bet, which I don't). > > Eric > >
