Ok. So you've survived the stinkers and the peanut gallery and the charlatans, the high priests, the prelates and the faithful of physics. In your own experiments you've seen muons or mischugenon.
On Sun, Nov 13, 2016 at 5:32 PM, Russ George <[email protected]> wrote: What is interesting is that the real data has always shone most brightly > even when the signal was incredibly poorly understood. That’s the benefit > of longevity and dedication the real shining bits tend to agglomerate into > an understandable thing. Such is the case it seems with Holmlid’s ‘muons’, > there are too many coincidences coming together to ignore his contributions > to what is becoming a choir. > What are those coincidences that lead one inevitably to the conclusion that Holmlid is seeing muons, and that he's seeing the same thing you believe you've been seeing? You speak with enough confidence to lead me to believe that you've read his work, are quite familiar with it and are able to support your position with concrete details. > As for being the tutor or free simple sound-bite tour-guide sorry I have > neither the time nor inclination to help the reluctant. There is so much to > do and so little time to do it. As Thomas Edison so aptly put it long ago, > “The thing I lose patience with most is the clock, its hands move too fast.” > Alas it's not for my edification that you should answer these questions. It's for your own credibility! You've taken on the position that Holmlid is seeing muons or mischugenon. You should now give support for that position. Eric
